On why the Han people failed to modernize smoothly?

Wu Yue

Historians and the Internet are keen to discuss a topic-using various "comparisons between Chinese and Western cultures" to demonstrate why China failed to modernize. Because they are either stupid or bad, most of the conclusions they draw are very nonsensical: what is the inferiority of the Han people, what is the small peasant economy, what is the nobleness of marine civilization.

today i want to say

All questions like this "comparison between China and the West" are all false propositions!

This kind of question itself simply does not hold water. They made at least three mistakes:

• The first mistake is to compare the Han nationality with the N western nations
• The second mistake is that even if they are compared from a cultural perspective, what they are comparing is not the Han tradition at all, but the "pseudo-tradition" under the rule of the Manchu Qing.
• The third mistake is that the Han people must be required to "spontaneously" modernize, without considering that the technologies, industries, sciences, and even ideas of modernization are all very easy to acquire through learning. Except for a few ethnic groups in Western Europe, all other ethnic groups in the world have obtained the results of modernization through learning.

Those who make this kind of comparison, on the one hand, "high standards and strict requirements" on the Han people, on the other hand, once the Han people fail to achieve spontaneous modernization, they will criticize the Han people as unbearable and worthless.

Whether it is stupid or bad, you judges can judge for themselves.

I have already complained about this under this question

How do you view the struggle between standard culture and overall Westernization?

The sad thing about this question is that this kind of comparison between China and the West is basically a false proposition.

Hu Shi (including intellectuals of his generation in the New Culture Movement, as well as most people in today's society) had a lot of misunderstandings about "standard culture" or "traditional Chinese culture".

The problem of addressing this question is actually untenable. Most of the titles of this kind of "comparison of China and the West" compare "the pseudo-tradition with Manchu and Qing characteristics" and "the successful modernization of multiple Western nations as a whole". It is not a real comparison between traditional Chinese culture and the West, let alone a comparison between China (Han) and a certain nation in the West.

**The whole comparison is very nonsensical, not only let China (Han people) single out the N ethnic groups in the West, but also let the Chinese side cut off their arms (that is, without considering the influence of the distorted rule of the Manchu Qing Dynasty). **The conclusion drawn is of course that "Chinese culture in Fira is unbearable, and the Western Zentraedi must accept it in its entirety to save the Chinese in Fira." The May 4th Movement, He Shang, and now many intellectuals still enjoy making this nonsensical comparison, which eventually led many Han people to form a kind of "we are too old, we must push everything back, we must rely on foreign Only ideas and alien rule can save” thinking. The so-called "being colonized for another three hundred years", "abolishing Chinese characters and Latinizing Chinese characters" and "inviting foreigners to exchange blood" are all products of this kind of thinking.

First of all, modernization is not an independent "invention" of a certain nation, but a product of the joint efforts of multiple nations.

Formal logic was discovered by the Greco-Romans.

renaissance in northern italy

City-states are created by commercial prosperity and cities.

The Age of Discovery was opened by the Iberians, relying on centralized government and geography.

The foundation of modern science was laid by Newton the Anza.

The Industrial Revolution took place in Great Britain where there were many coal mines

The entire modernization was achieved by the joint efforts of many European nations, and no nation could complete the process. Iberia can't do the Renaissance, and Italy can't do the great voyage. They are all doing what they are good at. Under the opportunity, the relay is completed, and this is the so-called modernization. The Han people are a nation without such conditions, just like all other nations in Eastern Europe, Asia, America and Africa . Why should the modernization completed by the joint efforts of multiple ethnic groups in Western Europe be completed by the Han people alone? Don't all other nations in the world learn it? As for why China doesn’t learn well and who is the ruler, don’t you understand? Comparing the combined success of several ethnic groups with the Han people as a single ethnic group, and discounting the legs of the Han people, and then saying that the Han people are inferior, the "traditional culture" garbage must be criticized. Is there any reason? Is there still Wang Fa?

The whole of natural science was discovered by the Greeks and Romans—Renaissance by the Italians—and invented by Newton the Ansa. Neither the French nor the Iberians were involved, let alone the Russians and Japanese, who, like the Han, were all learned from others. France learned it first because it was the closest, Russia learned it later because it was farther away, and Japan and China learned it last because it was the farthest away. Japan can modernize but China cannot, because China was ruled by the Manchus, and the Manchus guarded against the Han and suppressed the Han. They did not want their rule to be threatened, so they did not learn from it.

What's so difficult about this logic? Does it have a dime relationship with "traditional culture"?

Second, the Qing Dynasty and China before the Qing Dynasty (except the Yuan Dynasty) were very different in every aspect. Social atmosphere, ideological trends, cultural activities, degree of control, mental state of the people, and even aesthetics are all very different, and they are simply not the same thing.

Just a few examples:

The target most often used to criticize "traditional culture" - "Disciples Regulations", written in the Qing Dynasty

The Culture of Filial Piety Developed to Extreme Abnormality——"Twenty-Four Filial Piety"

It appeared in the Yuan Dynasty, was criticized in the Ming Dynasty, and became popular again in the Qing Dynasty

The insensitive and frightened mental state of the common people caused by the high-handed rule and literary inquisition—those who have read the records of the missionaries in the late Ming Dynasty will know it at a glance when they compare it with the records in the late Qing Dynasty

Cheongsam and mandarin jacket + braids - hair shaved and easy to wear, not much to say, understand everything. In addition, one more thing, the rustic aesthetics of bright red and green that has been handed down to this day is also left over from the Manchu Qing Dynasty, and the aesthetic fashion of the whole society is completely different from before.

Even the "traditional martial arts" changed a lot after the Manchu Qing Dynasty—the real traditional martial arts were mainly fighting with soldiers, which was very suitable for actual combat. Evolved into flowery boxing and embroidered legs, performance nature, lost its actual combat value, and became the so-called "traditional martial arts" that is ridiculed by all walks of life today.

All in all, I have learned how to behave now: When encountering words such as "traditional culture" and "standard culture", think reflexively **"Is this before the Manchu Qing Dynasty or brought by the Manchu Qing Dynasty?"**You You will find that some things that people often use to criticize the "traditional cultural dross" are brought by the Manchu Qing, or have been degraded by the Manchu Qing (such as Confucianism). Without the Qing Dynasty, these traditional cultures would continue to improve themselves to adapt to modern and modern society and become less "dross", just like the traditional culture of the Japanese, the traditional culture of the Russians, and the traditions of most other ethnic groups culture.

Why is it that only Chinese traditional culture has been so thoroughly criticized? ——Because the Manchu Qing hindered modernization, and the high-handed rule of the Manchu Qing caused the deterioration of culture, the so-called "tradition" dross in the 1910s was extremely large. Intellectuals raised their arms and shouted: "Abandon tradition!"

Looking at the world, only China was ruled by a barbaric and backward nation at the time of modernization due to natural disasters and man-made disasters. This is the real particularity of China in modern times.

However, the Manchu tradition is not really a tradition.

After figuring this out, everything suddenly became clear.

Recently, another friend discussed this with me, and I decided to edit and post our chat records.

Please read it carefully, and after reading it, you will understand why the Han Chinese failed to modernize smoothly, and why I said that the so-called Needham problem is a SB problem.

History buffs: I've always had a question I wanted to ask.

History buffs: Why did China (Han people) fail to modernize? Why did modernization happen in the West? How to solve the Needham problem?

Me: First of all, let’s clarify a definition. What is modernization?

History buffs: (in Baidu...)

History buffs: There is no clear definition. It probably refers to economic industrialization and commercialization, political legalization and democratization, ideological humanization and scientificization, etc...

Me: If you can’t give an abstract definition, you can give a concrete process!

History buffs: My history is not very good. According to my feeling, it is probably the Renaissance, then the great geographical discovery, the great voyage, then the foundation of modern science and technology, the Enlightenment, and finally the industrial revolution, right? Oh by the way, also consider the logic and mathematics invented by the ancient Greeks, which laid the foundation for modern technology.

Me: Okay, it’s up to you.

Act I: What is the essence of the West's first modernization?

Me: First of all, it is clear that the so-called "Western civilization" and "Oriental civilization" are only relative concepts in geography, and they are fictitious references. The people of Ming Dynasty would think that Timur and Ottoman belonged to the West, while these two Muslim countries were regarded as the proper East in the eyes of Poles and Eastern Romans, not to mention that in the eyes of the British, Eastern Rome was almost an "Oriental ancient civilization". So the so-called West and East are only general meanings, and they cannot be used to analyze problems too much. Is there a problem with my saying this?

The remnants of He Shang who entered in disorder: Fart! The West is clearly a marine civilization! Full of enterprising and pioneering spirit. The east is Fira's farming civilization, of course it can't compare with others!

Me: First of all, let me clarify that there is no such thing as marine civilization. Take the typical so-called "Western countries"-France and Germany as examples. They are all agricultural civilizations, and they are also the so-called "small peasant economy".

The remnants of the chaos: What about Britain, Spain, and the United States?

Me: Before the Great Geographical Discovery, the British (Anglo-Saxons) were still farming on the British Isles, and were invaded and ruled by the Normans; the Spaniards were conquered by the Moors, and they were still busy recovering their lost land until the 13th century. Nothing at all (except fishing). As for the Americans, the foundation of the founding of the United States is the farmers and craftsmen of the 13 independent states, which has nothing to do with the ocean.

Me: In fact, the "marine civilization" in your mind only lasted a few hundred years from the great geographical discovery to the present. The great geographical discovery itself is a very important part of modernization. Using "an important process of modernization" to demonstrate "why they were able to modernize first", don't you think it's a bit funny?

Me: In addition, let me make a complaint, the concept of "marine civilization" concocted by you Heshang faction is itself something that is not even an imported product. There are no such phrases as ocean civilization or maritime civilization in Western historical research. You guys go get this search paper, and the most likely one that comes up is probably the one that studies the Tongan Empire in the Pacific Islands (laughs)? A self-deprecating word that was invented from the beginning to the end, so stop talking nonsense here.

Me: Going back to the question just now, I think specific issues need to be analyzed in detail, and the West cannot be generalized as a whole. The so-called West and East are only general meanings, and it is not easy to use them to analyze specific issues. Is there a problem with my saying this?

History buffs: No problem. From Japan’s point of view, Ming Dynasty or the West is a relative concept. There is nothing difficult to understand. But what does that have to do with what we're talking about?

Me: see your question? "Why did modernization happen in the West?"

History buffs: Does it mean that the so-called "East" and "West" should not be used as the foothold for comparison? What should I use then?

Me: Of course I use "ethnicity"!

History buffs: Tell me!

Me: First of all, the modernization path you just sorted out is basically correct:

1. Ancient Greece invented logic and mathematics

2. Renaissance

3. Great geographic discoveries

4. The foundation of modern technology

5. The Enlightenment

Me: The Greeks invented logic and mathematics (discoveries to be exact, but that's beside the point). right? So are the Greeks and those in Western Europe the same nation?

History buffs: The Greeks and the Franks, Anglo-Saxons, Visigoths, etc. of Western Europe are indeed not the same people. The descendants of the classical Greeks later lived in the Eastern Roman Empire, and were later conquered by the Ottomans, and they were not restored until modern times. Those peoples in Western Europe are the descendants of the Germanic barbarians who destroyed the Western Roman Empire.

Me: That’s right, what about the Renaissance? Where did the Renaissance originate?

History buffs: Northern Italian city-states.

Me: The city-states of Venice and Genoa are prosperous in business and have been divided for a long time. This breeds a tolerant and open artistic atmosphere and brings about the Renaissance. right?

History buffs: Well, next up is the great discoveries.

History buffs: I am familiar with this. It was opened by two teeth—Spain and Portugal.

Me: What advantages do Spain and Portugal have that allow them to start the great geographical discovery?

History buffs: First of all, it must be geography. Looking at the map, I know that the Iberian Peninsula is the closest to the Americas. ,

History buffs: Secondly, Liangya is somewhat..."centralized" in a sense. Many early navigators were heavily funded by the royal family to explore, and there is a feeling of "concentrating power to do big things".

History buffs: It should be these two points that allowed them to be the first to start the "Great Discovery Age"!

Me: That's right. We can make a hypothetical scenario - can the New World be discovered under the conditions of the northern Italian city-states? Can the political atmosphere and geography of Spain and Portugal lead the Renaissance?

History buffs: I'm afraid it won't work... The reason I just said is that this thing requires certain conditions. However, the Renaissance provided some spiritual impetus to the great geographical discoveries.

Me: This is what I want to say, the essence of modernization is the completion of multi-ethnic relay. It is impossible for the two teeth to lead the Renaissance, and it is difficult for Venice and Genoa to discover America. But the two relayed each other, and the process continued. The great geographical discovery has brought more primitive accumulation, what is the next step?

History buffs: lay the foundations of the natural sciences.

Me: Who laid the foundation of natural science?

History buffs: it was Newton - an Anglo-Saxon. "Principles of Natural Philosophy and Mathematics", published in 1687.

Me: What's next?

History buffs: Enlightenment, France has the most developed civil society, so the Enlightenment first appeared there.

Me: Same as the previous few steps, one nation starts first, and other nations follow. The Renaissance spread across Europe from south to north; ships from all over Western Europe flocked to America to participate in the triangular trade in the Age of Discovery; Enlightenment ideas also spread throughout the "West" with the gunfire of the Great Revolution and the Napoleonic Code

History buffs: Then let me reorganize it. The so-called Western modernization is actually the case? ——

1. Ancient Greeks: Inventing Logic and Mathematics
2. Northern Italians: Renaissance
3. The Iberians: A Great Geographical Discovery
4. Anza Man: The foundation of modern technology
5. Frenchmen: Enlightenment

I'm right. In fact, one step was missed—1.5 The existence of the Eastern Roman Empire protected the nations of Western Europe from barbarian aggression. Because if unfortunately during the accumulation period of the agricultural society, or was invaded by barbarians on the eve of modern times, the productivity will be greatly reduced, the consequences will be catastrophic, and I will talk about this issue later.

History buff: Speaking of which, is it true that the so-called advantages of the Western nations are that they are close to each other, communicate more, and learn quickly?

Me: That's right, that's it.

Me: To put it bluntly, the geography of the Western European countries has another advantage—the farthest away from the Mongolian Plateau and the Greater Khingan Mountains, the most terrifying source of barbarians in the entire Eurasian continent, and there is Eastern Rome, the Greek-Roman nation-state, in the middle Act as a shield to protect them from the barbarian invasion that interrupts civilization.

History buffs: Ah, that’s true. The isotherm of Eurasia is slanted. It gets colder as it goes east, and the barbarians are more brutal and difficult to deal with.

History buffs: So the slow modernization of Russia can be explained? Is it because they are a little farther away?

I am right.

History buffs: Among the later great powers, Japan learned the slowest, because Japan was the farthest away?

Me: That's right, that's it.

History Buffs: Is it that simple?

Me: It's that simple.

History buffs: Then why did China not learn it?

Me: Next, let's talk about this issue.

Act Two: The colonial rule of the Qing Dynasty prevented the Han people from modernizing smoothly

Me: Let me directly raise my point of view: there are two conditions for a nation to be modernized: one is that the nation’s agricultural accumulation has reached a certain level, the other is that the nation has not been colonized by barbarians when the wave of modernization comes Resistance to learn.

History buffs: The first one is easy to understand, otherwise Africa would have been modernized long ago (laughs)

Me: That’s right, Japan’s slow modernization is actually due to this reason. Japan’s agricultural productivity has always been poor. The per capita wealth and grain are much lower than that of Jiangnan at the end of Ming Dynasty. Jiangnan at the end of Ming Dynasty was really rich, not worse than that of the Netherlands at the same time.

History buffs: the end of the Ming Dynasty...then the next...

Me: Yes, and then we will arrive at Manqing. You might want to ask me just now: Which one of the two conditions is not satisfied for the Han people? I can tell you, none of them are enough. Due to the arrival of the Manchu Qing Dynasty, the two conditions that were originally met were not met at once.

Me: When the Manchus entered the customs, tens of millions of Han people died. In the early Qing Dynasty compared with the late Ming Dynasty, the cultivated land was greatly reduced, and a large number of precious agricultural and handicraft technical books such as "Tiangong Kaiwu" and "Qimin Yaoshu" were lost. Cultural relics in the long river of history. Experienced old farmers and skilled craftsmen died in batches in the brutal massacre, and their accumulated experience and secrets for generations were destroyed. The civilized cities of the Han people turned into hells on earth full of corpses, and the fertile fields of the Han people became barren and inhabited. This is a major setback in the productivity of an agricultural society.

History buffs: Alas, the entry of the Manchus into the customs was indeed a catastrophe for China.

Me: Not just this. If the Manchu Qing, like the normal Han Dynasty, did not strictly control the people, but allowed a certain degree of social autonomy, then the smart and hardworking Han people could slowly recover from the sufferings of the early Qing Dynasty.

Me: But Manchu is not like this. The standpoint of "a small family faces a big country" and the numerous crimes they committed when they entered the customs made them tremble all the time. "Defending the Manchus and Hans" was the top priority that the Manchus always cared about. The Manchu Qing relied on the Eight Banners and the Mancheng to establish a "deep-to-grassroots" stability maintenance system throughout China. Once the Han people showed signs of resistance, they would be punished. Of course, the right to define this so-called "symptoms of resistance" is also in the hands of the Manchurians. For example, if someone gathered more than a certain number of people, the rulers of the Manchu and Qing Dynasties would think that this person was plotting something wrong and would directly execute him. It doesn't matter whether this person is going to rebel, or just wants to teach, hang out with, or do business with others. This means that all social self-government, people's voluntary organizations and associations are declared invalid, and the whole society is completely inactivated.

History buffs: Well...

Me: Not only that, even if you give up all dangerous social activities and concentrate on sending love books at home, reciting poems and composing poems, troubles will still come to your door.

History buffs: I know this. Literary prisons, right? During the Qianlong period, there were hundreds of literary prisons, involving tens of thousands of people.

Me: The key is that the Han people were forced to form an atmosphere of indifference and non-talking about state affairs. If you think about it casually, you risk losing your head. The entire nation has lost both freedom of action and freedom of thought. It really became the "numb Chinese" criticized by intellectuals from all walks of life later. Of course, these modern intellectuals mistakenly criticized the Qing Dynasty as a typical example of the entire ancient times, which was a big mistake, and It had very serious consequences, but that's another topic for another day.

Me: Under this kind of strict surveillance and wanton abuse, how can the Han people talk about learning, let alone creation? !

Me: To give you the simplest example, someone proposed to develop firearms in the middle of the Qing Dynasty, but Qianlong immediately rejected it on the grounds that "riding and archery is the foundation of Manchuria"? why is that? This is because Qianlong, the chief of the Manchu and Qing Dynasties, knew clearly that after the development of firearms, it was not the Manchus who were strengthened, but the Han people. Firearms require less training, and after the firearms are installed, manpower can be converted into combat power to the maximum extent, and the armed forces of the Han people can be greatly enhanced. So what good is the development of firearms for the Manchus?

Me: For the most important military technology innovation for the country, the Manchu and Qing Dynasties considered the issue from the perspective of Manchu-Han defense. Then, isn’t the attitude that the Manchus would adopt towards other Han people’s spontaneous learning of the achievements of modernization, isn’t it obvious? At the end of the Qing Dynasty, the Han people not only did not have several great thinkers, great scientists, and great artists like in previous dynasties, not even one! Not even a single translated work that introduces foreign ideas, such as "The Western Regions of the Tang Dynasty" or the works of the Western French Party in the late Ming Dynasty, appeared! Is this a problem of the Han people themselves? Isn't this a clear proof that the Manchu colonists hindered the modernization of the Han people?

History buffs: Alas, when others are flourishing, we happen to suffer natural disasters and man-made disasters. The Ming Dynasty died in the Manchu Qing Dynasty. It is really a great tragedy for the Han people.

(long silence)

Act Three: Other Questions

History buffs: To be honest, what you said above is very reasonable, but I have also read many people's statements on the Internet, and they all think that China cannot be modernized even under the Han regime.

Me: What's the point? Consistent rights and responsibilities. Those with full power have full responsibility, and those without power have no responsibility. The Manchu Qing monopolized all the power in the whole society and practiced high-pressure totalitarianism. Why is it that the oppressed Han people are behind the problem?

History buffs: They have several versions, let's go through them one by one.

History buffs: The first theory is that the emperor of the Ming Dynasty would prevent the people from learning Western technology and hinder modernization in order to rule stably.

Me: There are two things that make this point of view untenable. First: The emperor of the Ming Dynasty would not hinder the Han people from learning Western ideas and technologies, as evidenced by the Western Law Party at the end of the Ming Dynasty.

Me: Second, the biggest difference between the Ming Dynasty (or other Han dynasties) and the Qing Dynasty is that even if the emperor of the Ming Dynasty wanted to prevent the Han people from learning Western ideas and technologies, he could not do so.

History buffs: why not?

Me: Because if the Han emperor wants to be autocratic, he cannot form a community above society to help him "maintain stability". What is a community? At least the identities of oneself and future generations cannot be changed easily, otherwise a stable mechanism of making profits with the emperor cannot be formed. The emperor himself was a loner and had to rule society on his own. He can engage in literary inquisition and dictatorship, but in this way he will close his eyes and listen. The emperor cannot control the whole society by himself, and rebels will soon come to his door. In the history of China, there was a case of the autocracy of the emperor of the nation, which soon ushered in its demise. He was the Qin Dynasty. Therefore, the emperor of his own nation must respect social autonomy, so that the dynasty will last long.

Me: There is no such problem in the rule of alien races, because the alien races as a whole can override the main ethnic group as a community. A typical example is the Eight Banners of the Qing Dynasty. The Manchu chiefs relied on the Eight Banners to maintain their rule and suppress the Han people. The Eight Banners were tightly wound around the Manchu chiefs, and they brought their own dry food to help the chiefs maintain stability, because this was also to stabilize their own interests.

History buffs: It means that the emperor of his own nation may also practice totalitarianism, but it will not last long? But alien rule, because it has its own "basic disk", can it maintain a longer totalitarian rule?

Me: That's right, the term "basic disk" is a good one. Totalitarianism is nothing more than the taming of society. The problem is that the emperor of his own family could not form a stable ruling team, and it would be good if he could tame the society for 50 years. After 50 years, the bureaucracy and the society have joined forces, and the traditional freedom and customary law of the society have returned. However, the Manchu Qing Dynasty continued to engage in literary inquisition until Qianlong, and engaged in high-pressure totalitarianism to tame the Han society.

The offspring of bureaucrats will soon fall down if they fail the imperial examination. The children of landlords will not have much political power if they do not become officials. A businessman will return to the common people once he goes bankrupt. Individual identities within a nation are fluid and changeable, but Han people will always be Han people, and Manchus will always be Manchus .

Me: In the final analysis, only alien rule can destroy the inherent freedom and laws of society, and can continuously "reform society" for hundreds of years. The so-called "going deep into the grassroots" and "transforming society from the inside out" that some people are thinking about are exactly what colonists can do by themselves. The real and long-term totalitarian rule is exactly an imported product of the Qing Dynasty. , it is impossible to do this with the Han Dynasty.

History buffs: I understand this question a bit, and I will think about it when I go back. I always feel that your words imply something else, something very important.

History buffs: The second argument is that some Marxists (or leftists) believe that Confucianism hindered the modernization of the Han people, because the Ming and Qing Dynasties both used Confucianism, so even if they changed to the Ming Dynasty or other Han dynasty, it would still be impossible. modernization.

Me: Is Confucianism the economic base or the superstructure?

History buffs: is the superstructure

Me: What about modernization?

History buffs: Modernization in a broad sense may also include some content in the field of thought... But it is true that modernization is first reflected in the great development of productivity.

Me: These people still call themselves Marxists? How did Marx discuss the economic base and superstructure?

History buffs: the economic base determines the superstructure...

Me: I don't need much. In addition, let me mention one more thing, Japan is also a Confucian cultural circle, the Japanese study modernization, how are they learning?

History buffs: This question can be passed, and now I don’t understand how they dumped the blame on Confucianism.

Me: The Confucianism that has been degraded by the Mongol Yuan and the Qing Dynasty can indeed be blacked out, but is that also the fault of the Meng Yuan and the Manchus? After all, the barbarians have knives in their hands, and the Confucian scholars who refused to cooperate were all killed. They can be free To reform Confucianism to legitimize their own rule. Still the same sentence, rights and responsibilities are the same.

History buffs: There is another argument that the small peasant economy hinders modernization.

Me: People who say this must not know that France also has a so-called "small peasant economy". In addition, what is the logic of this small peasant economy hindering modernization?

History buffs: Maybe it refers to the lack of change in the small peasant economy and outdated thinking?

Me: Is this the superstructure hindering the economic base again? People with outdated ideas will be left behind by their neighbors who have increased productivity, and become workers who passively enter the tide of modernization. Is this not the normal operation of modernization in various countries? And judging from the situation of the spread of Western learning eastward in the late Ming Dynasty, the so-called "small peasant economy" is completely different? Women's clothing was prevalent among Jiangnan scholar-bureaucrats, and some people even took to the streets naked; market novels such as Jin Ping Mei were extremely popular among ordinary people, and rural trade and citizen life were colorful and prosperous. The so-called stubborn and corrupt Confucianism? The so-called lack of change in the small peasant economy? Judging from the situation at the end of Ming Dynasty, this is not the case at all!

History buffs: Some people think that the landlord class will hinder modernization, on the grounds that the emerging bourgeoisie will shake its own rule.

Me: Many of the bourgeoisie in various countries are transformed from the former landlord class (laughs). In fact, this momentum has already appeared in the late Ming Dynasty. When new production methods and ways of making money came, the landlords were more than happy to abandon the land and embrace better industrial capital. Who has trouble with money?

History buffs: Well, from what you said, it is indeed true. It is obviously a very simple problem for the colonists. Why do many people insist on "finding reasons from themselves"?

History buffs: It may be that we were taught to find reasons from ourselves when we were young, alas.

Me: The reason is very simple. Some people hope that the Han people will always find the reason from themselves. They hope that the Han people will always ignore themselves as colonists and middlemen, and always ignore the harm and side effects brought to the Han people by their long-term tossing and exploitation. Bar.

History Buff: What? You mean Manchu?

Me: yeah (laughs)

History buffs: ?

History buffs: Alas, although you said that it would be nice if we could learn from other nations when modernization comes, but I still hope that we can modernize first spontaneously.

Me: Your request is equivalent to asking the Han people to go through many steps that Greece, Northern Italy, Iberia, Anglo-Saxons and other ethnic groups have completed together (laughs). Why reinvent the wheel? Han people should remember that we are a great nation, and at the same time we are only one of the nations, and there is no need to accomplish what other nations can do together.

Me: In fact, as long as the Ming Dynasty is succeeded by a Han regime, after successful modernization, it will radiate southward to Southeast Asia, westward to Central Asia, and northward to eliminate the Far Eastern superpower that Mongolia and Russia compete for Siberia. No. of modern Japan.

Me: The Han Republic in that time and space, the Han nationality in that time and space, will be a nation whose traditional culture has not been broken down and has been properly sublated, instead of mistaking all kinds of Manchu "pseudo-traditions" as real traditions, and entangled in whether to maintain or not. A nation that is completely abandoned; the Han nationality in that time and space will be a high-spirited and progressive Han nationality, rather than a timid nation that forcibly "reflects itself" even if it is not caused by itself; the Han nationality in that time and space will be a civilization A strong, great nation standing in the forest of all nations in the world, not a sad nation that is under heavy pressure and is still facing the crisis of population gap.

History buffs: Alas! Unfortunately, with the tragedy of 1644, we will never see these again.

Summarize:

1. It is very normal and appropriate to learn from the achievements of other nations
2. The essence of the so-called "the West takes the lead in modernization" - multi-ethnic joint efforts, ring relay:

• Ancient Greeks: Inventing Logic and Mathematics
• Eastern Roman Empire: Against the Persians, Arabs, and Turks, objectively protecting the agricultural productivity in the hinterland of Europe from being seriously damaged
• Northern Italians: Renaissance
• The Iberians: A Great Geographical Discovery
• Anza Man: The foundation of modern technology
• Frenchmen: Enlightenment

1. Modernization requires two conditions:

• Agricultural productivity is sufficiently developed
• Ability to effectively learn from other peoples without being hindered by colonizers

1. Why did the Han Chinese fail to modernize?

• The agricultural productivity, science and technology accumulated until the end of the Ming Dynasty were all wiped out in the massacre of the Manchu Qing invasion
• During the two-and-a-half-century rule of the Qing Dynasty, in order to maintain its own status, it has always prevented the Han people from learning the advanced technology of the Western nations.

1. Why would the Ming Dynasty not hinder modernization, but the Manchus would?

• The rule of the Manchu Qing was based on the "millions and eight banners" as the basic foundation. Relying on these "insiders" to maintain stability, the chiefs of the Manchu Qing could control all aspects of society and restrain the development of the Han people to the greatest extent.
• The emperor of the Ming Dynasty was a loner, without the so-called Eight Banners basic plan, and had to compromise with civil officials, scholar-bureaucrats and other sectors of society. Even if the Ming emperor wanted to exercise tight control over society, he could not.
• Furthermore, the emperor of the Ming Dynasty did not have the concern of "a small family facing a big country", and he himself did not need to hinder modernization. There is no need for scholar-bureaucrats and landlords to hinder the modernization of the Han people. On the contrary, once they modernize, they will become capitalists and they will be the biggest beneficiaries.

1. 1644 was the beginning of all tragedies in modern China, and also the beginning of the history of the Han people being colonized in modern times.

Attached are two pictures - a comparison of the social structure of the Han Empire and the Manchu Qing Dynasty: