- Why were the Chinese such successful subjects? - As seen
in Chapter I, the father's status in the family, the obedience
that was shown him, the connection between his position
in the family and imperial rule in China, the ancient rituals,
and the deep interconnection felt not only by the nuclear
family, but frequently, also by the tribal-family - are
linked to the figure of the emperor, and to the Chinese
desire for unified government. The Chinese were indeed linked
by their common worldview and basic beliefs, and even by
the destiny that was shared by 'anyone under the sun' (a
reference to the Chinese). They shared one father - the
emperor, the only person with the power to maintain nature's
equilibrium. Several reasons were suggested in Chapter III
as to why no industrial revolution took place in China.
We have now provided enough background to properly evaluate
these reasons: Reason I: A familial system that repressed
the younger generation - if industry had developed in China
and then collapsed because of the absence of a workforce,
then this reason would seem more pertinent. Reason II: The
Chinese reverence of agricultural labor is discounted for
the same reason. Reason III: The uncontested status of Chinese
intellectuals that eliminated their need to prove themselves
through scientific achievements, in contrast to the competition
that motivated Western scholars - seems historically inaccurate.
There is no evidence that Western scholars competed with
the military or merchants, but rather only among themselves.
In any case, competition between the classes was not the
driving motivation in the West, but rather the inventive
spirit - so markedly lacking in China - that comes with
market demand and sources of funding. Reason IV: The divisiveness
and internal rivalry within the government that led to economic
competition and growth does appear to be a primary reason.
Reason V: The conservative nature of the three dynasties
in China does seem to have had a major impact, but this
quality was the result of another cause, that also must
be examined. Reason VI: The general nature of the imperial
system that for internal considerations sought to avoid
creating concentrations of economic strength within the
empire was a reason no industrial revolution occurred in
China, but not the root cause, the primary cause. Reason
VII: The emphasis on paternal respect, the attachment to
the spirit of the ancestors, and the willingness to submit
to leadership, and the resultant humility - are in fact
the root causes behind the loyalty and commitment to the
imperial system. Yet, this still does not answer why the
Chinese sought to establish a unified government for themselves.
This apparently resulted from the view that was shared by
the Chinese and advanced by their philosophers and emperor
- that the emperor played a critical role in balancing between
natural forces and human forces, a balance that is essential
if no natural disasters are to occur and if life is to be
tranquil and fruitful. This belief gave them good cause
to seek the endurance of the imperial form of government.
This belief was coupled with the recognition that all the
Chinese constitute one unity, one nation, and that no national
differences exist between different regions of China. Any
conflict over control of different sections of China was
simply the personal business of the rival rulers and it
carried no import for the citizens of these areas, since
they felt no greater loyalty to one ruler over the other.
There was no true ethnic-tribal division between the residents
of different areas ruled by different rulers, since the
institution of the traditional Xiao doesn't support division
in the existing government. Even the various rival rulers
could not justify the split in government, and it was clear
to each of them that only one of them could rule, and that
there was no option to divide and share control. Under these
circumstances, there existed in China the aspiration for
national unity, an aspiration that was linked to ancient
ritual, which in China was strengthened by the relationships
within the nuclear family, and particularly the principle
of paternal respect. The discussion of the root reason behind
China's lack of industrial growth relates to the study of
the internal changes in the bourgeois family in Europe and
in the family structure and intimate relationships within
the American family in the 19th century. Europe is presently
undergoing a similar process to the one that China underwent
so many years ago. This process explains their desire for
unification. In retrospect, both World Wars seem more like
clashes within the family of White Christians, a family
whose bonds of common tradition, culture, and faith, are
much greater than their differences. Europe endured great
tragedies before it came to its present realization, which
most Europeans believe will provide them with security.
Most Americans and Russians feel basically the same way.
It is even reasonable to foresee in the distant future a
unification of all White Christian men as one nation that
even joins Europe with North America. Many Americans of
European descent, who see themselves - in the not so distant
future - becoming a minority in their own land - would have
reason to support such a union. Christianity is a much more
aggressive religion than Buddhism or Daoism, and consequently
it constitutes a strong traditional-ethnic component that
can unite White Christian European man, just as the Chinese
united. The French today are primarily the descendants of
farmers from diverse origins and cultures. A few hundreds
of years ago, they considered themselves completely distinct
from each other, and most did not even speak French. Their
unification resulted from a strong aggressive rule of a
Parisian princess who joined various conquests under her
rule, and imposed the Parisian tongue (which became French)
in all the provinces under her rule, and in this manner
the French nation was born. Benedict Anderson, describes
similar unification processes throughout the world. Regarding
Scotland, he quotes Siton-Weston who describes the evolution
of the Scottish tongue: " It developed from a fusion
of Saxony and French, though less of the latter and more
from the South from Celtic and Scandinavian sources. They
spoke in this language not only in Eastern Scotland but
also in Northern England. Scottish, or 'Northern English,'
was the language of the Scottish court and the social elite
(that either spoke or didn't speak also Gaelic), and also
the language of the entire population in the southeastern
lowlands of Scotland. It was also the language of the poets
Robert Henryson and William Dunbar. It could have developed
into a distinct literary tongue in modern times, if the
unification in 1603 hadn't caused southern English to prevail,
penetrating the royal court, the administration, and the
upper classes in Scotland." Recognition of the distinct
European 'nationalist' identities began in England in the
17th century, and the process was complete in Europe by
the 20th century, a relatively short time period. Chinese
national consolidation took longer, over a 1000 years, and
their nationalism after it was achieved has endured for
over 3200 years. The Europeans - in contrast to the Chinese
- are presently forming a joint European Union, after attempting
over the course of 100-350 years to form distinct nationalist
entities. Reason IV above already relates to Bodde's theories
about the Maoist religion that endorsed technological developments,
in contrast to Confucianism that promoted the study of literature
over technological research. Reasons V and VI above relate
to the expectation that Moism had the potential to encourage
Chinese intellectuals to develop science and industry. Since
this development conflicted with imperial interests, there
were two choices - either Moism would be stronger than the
imperial interests and would prevail, or the Maoist idea
would be forced to 'bow' to the imperial interests. Though
the possibility that the emperors would have adopted Moism
over Confucianism is merely a theoretical possibility, it
should be recalledthat: 1. Moism was a kind of religion
deeply immersed in spirits and demons, and 2. Polytheistic
religions are classically non-aggressive. The combination
of these two factors makes it likely that in a confrontation
between a pagan religion like Moism and a vital imperial
interest, the imperial interest would have prevailed. Answer
I: In Both China and Europe, developments in the nuclear
family unit proved dominant, and responsible, though indirectly,
for the occurrence of the Industrial Revolution in the West
and not in Imperial China. Answer II: According to SCivin,
the answer, to a question as basic and fundamental as ours,
cannot be simple. Thus, while the previous answer already
provides a solution to the question, it is fitting to offer
an additional answer that does not detract from the first
one, but only comes to supplement it. Western man was ruled,
until the middle of the second millennium, by Christian
religion, institutions, and law, and even kings sought the
Pope's sanction. The rule of Christianity was aggressive
and powerful, definitely by Chinese standards that did not
attribute any ruling power to religion. As Christianity's
influence began to decline, Western man needed to find an
alternate source of morality and code of behavior, and the
governments of the time sought and found new sources of
legitimization. Man found himself seated on the royal throne,
but it was patently obvious that in contrast to the absolute
truth and absolute morality that were attributed to a divine
source, man does not possess absolute truth, morality, and
legitimacy to rule. Kant's 'pure practical reason,' Hobbes'
'social contract,' nationalism such as that awakened by
Protestantism in England, Rousseau's democratic principles,
as well as Bentham's theory of utilitarianism, all came
to replace the divine 'objective' source of morality. Kant's
theories were advanced further by Darwin's theory of evolution.
As part of their liberation from the rule of religion, Western
intellectuals built up modern science, and developed new
sources of strength that came to replace those that secular
man had rejected. One of these sources of strength was physical
science and industry, products of the scientific and industrial
revolutions. Scientific and industrial-economic motivations
were as strong as the religious impulses they came to replace,
and they yielded incredible far-reaching results. Another
aspect of the religious revolution was the establishment
of a civil religion, as foreseen by Rousseau, and as developed
in the United States, and then spread throughout most of
the world. Nationalism also grew stronger, and more radical,
leading to the rise of fascism and Nazism, and even in its
liberal form, as in the US, it manifested radicalism. This
paralleled the characteristic reaction to the radical religious
structure that existed in Western China before the civil
revolution due to its distinct tradition, a widespread tradition
even in countries that, because of Chinese influence, did
not adopt such radicalism. Thus, the dethroning of God obligated
science to seek to emulate the precision of God, His omniscience
and perfection, and to build a strong economic and political
force that would empower the new ruler, man, who had unseated
God. Thus, it was not only competition between various sources
of power that fueled scientific and industrial development,
but also rivalry with God, and man's need and fate to replace
God. This tragic destiny of man led to his fanatical excessive
ambition, of which development of science and industry and
aggressive colonialism were the most prominent signs. Western
man needed to undergo an Industrial Revolution, and to conquer
space in order to prove his potential in these areas. Chinese
culture did not need to compete in these ways. It did not
rebel against God. God had never ruled her. In other words,
religion in China was non-aggressive - and when there was
concern that Buddhism was becoming a threat to the government
in the 9th century, the government immediately dispersed
their monks and stripped them of all their belongings. Therefore,
no revolt against the rule of religion took place in China.
The religions wielded great influence over the society and
the government indirectly, through a system of values that
was transmitted directly, and even more so indirectly, through
the channels of Confucianism. This indirect influence of
Chinese religions, especially that of ancient customs, was
primarily responsible for the developments described in
this section, and to the preclusion of a scientific or industrial
revolution in China. Christianity ruled in the West, a religion
that seeks to missionize, an aggressive religion relative
to Eastern religions in general and to Chinese religions
specifically. The political rebellion against the Christian
religion and the enthronement of man in the place of God
were the primary causes of the scientific and industrial
revolution in the West. In short, the differences between
Christianity and Chinese religions are key to understanding
how and why science and industry developed as they did in
different areas of the world.
