Discussion:
The Wong Dynasty
(too old to reply)
s***@yahoo.com
2006-08-21 08:58:46 UTC
Permalink
Revisiting a discussion with Joe Wang, back in 1999.

19th century China was screwed a bunch of different ways. Can we fix
this? Let's try.


[handwave] I give China a Great Man.

POD: 1815, a male child is born to a family of wealthy landowners in
central China. Young Wong will grow up to be a more-than-competent
general, a more-than-competent administrator, and very very clever and
farsighted.

By the 1840s, he's an ambitious young general under the Qing... but
the real difference isn't seen until the 1860s, when General Wong wins
a couple of major victories over the Taiping, bringing that rebellion
to a swifter end than in OTL. Luckily for him, he's busy killing
Taipings when the Franco-British army arrives in Peking and burns the
palace, so he's not tainted with that defeat.

Wong keeps winning battles, the Dowager Empress tries to have him
removed or killed, and he ends up marching north, victorious army in
tow, and overthrowing the Qing.

Track #1: Wong simply overthrows the Qing, claims the Mandate of
Heaven, and declares a new Wong Dynasty.

Problem: Wong is soon fighting Emperors Chang, Li, and Wu. Once the
Qing is overthrown everything is up for grabs, and all of the generals
are going to want to be emperor.

This leads to an "earlier warlordism in China" TL. That's interesting,
but it's not what we want here. So we shift to

Track #2: Wong takes out the Dowager Empress. OTL a couple of royal
princes, I and Cheng, just barely missed getting rid of her when the
Emperor died in 1861. They nearly got her, twice, but in the end she
turned the tables on them and they got the silk cord.

So let's have General Wang succeed where the princes failed, and remove
Empress Cixi from the board. Now he can rule as Regent from 1865 to
1873, when the young Emperor dies of natural causes just as in OTL. He
can then formally take the throne without undue difficulty.

At this point Wong is in his early fifties, so probably good for
another 15 or 20 years. We'll say he has a couple of healthy young
adult sons, so the succession is assured. Let's assume that, other
than the Taipings having been crushed rather faster than in OTL, the
China he inherits is identical to the China of OTL.

So. What can Emperor Wong do? Is China screwed regardless? Or can he
launch a more effective course of modernization than iOTL?

Some thoughts:

1) Push for mass literacy. 19th century China was more literate than
you might think, but the modal Chinese was still an illiterate or
semiliterate peasant living near subsistence level. The Japanese laid
the foundation of modernization with mass primary education; China
should do the same.

There may be some resistance to this among the peasants (the kids are
needed in the fields) but that's what the Mandate of Heaven is for.

2) Reform the army, obviously. He may have gotten a head start on
this already. Note that the army need not be brought up to Western
standards overnight. Getting it to the point where it could put up a
respectable defensive fight against western-level aggressors would be a
huge step forward. A professional military, rather than a bunch of
feudal levies, would be a big start.

3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.

4) A national assembly. OTL, 19th century China had lots of
provincial assemblies, but not a national one. It's a good way to
focus nationalist feeling, and also to draw out the competent and
ambitious for either co-opting or isolation. Long-term it might be a
rival center of authority, but that's long-term.

5) Reform _and expand_ the bureacracy. Easier said than done. But
you can't accomplish the reforms in education and the economy without a
powerful, competent and dedicated bureacracy. Taxes must be collected
and the new laws must be enforced. The Meiji Japanese had the unfair
advantage of inheriting a whole set of good instruments of government
from the Tokugawa. Still, China should be able to come up with
something nearly as good, given determination and a little time.

...time. How will the western powers, in the golden age of
imperialism, respond to a China that's serious about reform? How much
maneuvering room will Wong have?

Which brings us back to the central question: 19th century China --
totally screwed, or not?

Thoughts?


Doug M.
m***@willamette.edu
2006-08-21 17:50:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Empress Cixi from the board. Now he can rule as Regent from 1865 to
1873, when the young Emperor dies of natural causes just as in OTL. He
can then formally take the throne without undue difficulty.
At this point Wong is in his early fifties, so probably good for
another 15 or 20 years.
SNIP
Post by s***@yahoo.com
1) Push for mass literacy.
Well, he _could_ do that of course, but how likely is it to be in his
mental frame work in the 1860's or 1870's? Pushing for mass literacy
would be pretty radical in that time and place, and how much proof
would be available to a mid-19th century Chinese general who had spent
most of his life in the Army that mass literacy was good in and of
itself?

I don't have a problem with "Wong" as another Great Leader Who Shapes
His Country, but I think you'd have to give him some background in
which the reforms he does make sense. Not just because they are
obvious in retrospect, but because Wong's life history would make him
think they are the right thing to do for China.

Perhaps he could push for it at the end of his life? That wouldn't
help China as much of course, but by the 1880's and 1890's far more
countries will have adopted mass literacy as a way of life and it would
appear to be a more obvious route to modernization than it would have
in the 1860's.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
2) Reform the army, obviously. He may have gotten a head start on
No problem here.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
If he's a Westernizer, would he try to adopt the Gold Standard?
Post by s***@yahoo.com
4) A national assembly. OTL, 19th century China had lots of
OK, I can see this.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
5) Reform _and expand_ the bureacracy. Easier said than done. But
This is the one I'm most unsure of because so much depends upon _how_
it's brought about.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
...time. How will the western powers, in the golden age of
imperialism, respond to a China that's serious about reform?
Happy enough to have a stable area to sell goods to, but wary of
reforms that would hurt their ability to sell those goods. The key
point is that none of the above, with the possible exception of 2,
would be of any real concern to France or Britain (the only two
countries China had to really worry about in the 1865 - 1885 period),
and 1,3,&4 might make liberals in those countries more willing to cut
China slack in other areas.

Wong will be dead by the time China has to worry about Germany or
Japan, and by then the reforms will have made China strong and stable
enough to no longer be capable of being beaten up on the cheap. He
doesn't have to make China strong enough to invade Berlin, he just
has to make invading China result in a 10% increase in taxes in the
invading country.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
How much
maneuvering room will Wong have?
One big problem you didn't have Wong address was Opium. Probably
because there is not much he would be able to do that would help China
and not cause another Anglo-China war that he could ill afford.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Which brings us back to the central question: 19th century China --
totally screwed, or not?
I say "screwed" in the sense that even with Wong its 19th century is
not going to be that great, Chinese historians would still write of it
as a time of weakness and defeat with only the glimmer of reform to
give hope. But by the end of the 19th century they should be in a
position to have a good 20th century, so IMO that means they weren't
"totally screwed," the way I think Africa was in 1960 or so.

--
Mike Ralls
Juan Valdez
2006-08-21 23:39:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
1) Push for mass literacy.
Well, he _could_ do that of course, but how likely is it to be in his
mental frame work in the 1860's or 1870's? Pushing for mass literacy
would be pretty radical in that time and place, and how much proof
would be available to a mid-19th century Chinese general who had spent
most of his life in the Army that mass literacy was good in and of
itself?
Disagree. China has always historically had a high % of its population
literate, compared to other regions. Confucianism's goal is to elevate
the peasantry. The only reason mass literacy hadn't been tried, was
because scholars felt the peasants weren't 'ready.' Of course that's
code for elitism. An Emperor's support would do wonders, I'd think.
Post by m***@willamette.edu
I don't have a problem with "Wong" as another Great Leader Who Shapes
His Country, but I think you'd have to give him some background in
which the reforms he does make sense. Not just because they are
obvious in retrospect, but because Wong's life history would make him
think they are the right thing to do for China.
How 'bout the problems w/ illiterate troops during the Taiping? Perhaps
he incrementally builds mass literacy. Maybe he starts thinking in
terms of troop force multipliers to reduce logistical burdens of
supply huge, inefficient armies?
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Perhaps he could push for it at the end of his life? That wouldn't
help China as much of course, but by the 1880's and 1890's far more
countries will have adopted mass literacy as a way of life and it would
appear to be a more obvious route to modernization than it would have
in the 1860's.
OTL's Chinese history shows that moderate reforms made a huge net
impact. If he starts in the 1860s, then by the 1880s he's got a
whole generation of young literate men and a greater chance of
educating young geniuses.
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
If he's a Westernizer, would he try to adopt the Gold Standard?
If he's a centralizer, and Opium is draining specie, why not paper
money?
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
5) Reform _and expand_ the bureacracy. Easier said than done. But
This is the one I'm most unsure of because so much depends upon _how_
it's brought about.
China had the same number of civil servants from the late Ming onward,
even as its population grew. Combined with the habit of rotating
civil servants around and prefectures were pretty much on their own.
Is it any surprise the late Qing saw a rise in organized crime?
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
...time. How will the western powers, in the golden age of
imperialism, respond to a China that's serious about reform?
Happy enough to have a stable area to sell goods to, but wary of
reforms that would hurt their ability to sell those goods. The key
point is that none of the above, with the possible exception of 2,
would be of any real concern to France or Britain (the only two
countries China had to really worry about in the 1865 - 1885 period),
and 1,3,&4 might make liberals in those countries more willing to cut
China slack in other areas.
I think it depends on whether China still permits opium imports or not.
1/6 the crown's revenues were derived from Chinese opium sales.
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Wong will be dead by the time China has to worry about Germany or
Japan, and by then the reforms will have made China strong and stable
enough to no longer be capable of being beaten up on the cheap. He
doesn't have to make China strong enough to invade Berlin, he just
has to make invading China result in a 10% increase in taxes in the
invading country.
?? Wong only needs to give China a modern army, bureaucracy, and
civil society to make it pretty much invulnerable to any land war
against any of the other great powers. Japan was only able to mug
China after it had split to pieces and was beset w/ warlords.
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Which brings us back to the central question: 19th century China --
totally screwed, or not?
I say "screwed" in the sense that even with Wong its 19th century is
not going to be that great, Chinese historians would still write of it
as a time of weakness and defeat with only the glimmer of reform to
give hope. But by the end of the 19th century they should be in a
position to have a good 20th century, so IMO that means they weren't
"totally screwed," the way I think Africa was in 1960 or so.
Disagree. +1% pcgdp growth per year during the last 1/4 of the 19th
century will mean Japan has no hope of colonizing Korea or China.
China's economy was still huge, its state was obsolete. I'll reference
Kennedy, where he states that IOTL in 1860, China still had ~20%
of global manufacturing. Reforms around that time ought to stop the
Chinese slide which _accelerated_ by the closing decades of OTL's
19th c. More pcgdp growth means a wealthier state w/ a better equipped
army. By 1880, China might be strong enough to say 'bugger off' to
British opium peddlers and defend itself from the inevitable attack.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Eric D. Berge
2006-08-22 00:19:51 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:39:34 +0000 (UTC), "Juan Valdez"
Post by Juan Valdez
Japan was only able to mug
China after it had split to pieces and was beset w/ warlords.
Not technically true - the First Sino-Japanese War in 1894 had Japan
beating up on China before it really disintegrated.
d***@hushmail.com
2006-08-22 02:07:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eric D. Berge
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:39:34 +0000 (UTC), "Juan Valdez"
Post by Juan Valdez
Japan was only able to mug
China after it had split to pieces and was beset w/ warlords.
Not technically true - the First Sino-Japanese War in 1894 had Japan
beating up on China before it really disintegrated.
The truth is somewhere in between, IMO. You can make a decent case,
based on the poli-sci definition of "state," that the Qing state was a
thing of the past as early as the First Sino-Japanese War (if not
earlier) because they no longer had a monopoly on violence. As I noted
to Rich Rostrom just now, during the Taiping rebellion the Qing
devolved military authority to regional warlords such as Zeng Guofan.
These warlords were originally loyal to the Qing, but by the 1890s or
so this loyalty was in question (and by 1910 was obviously a thing of
the past). IIRC (and I probably don't) part of China's problem in 1894
was that only northern forces (the Beiyang Clique, led by one Yuan
Shikai and the most professional of the regional armies) participated.
However, the regional army leaders hadn't yet assumed other state
functions and weren't warring against each other, so it's also a bit
premature to say that China was "beset w/warlords" in 1894.
k***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2006-08-22 14:22:14 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Juan Valdez
I think it depends on whether China still permits opium
imports or not. 1/6 the crown's revenues were derived from
Chinese opium sales.
Not directly, Indian Opium production was a monopoly of the EIC
until the mutiny, and then of the Government. The EIC never sold
opium in China it's trade privileges were good to risk. Instead
the Opium was sold to independent middlemen.

Ken Young
m***@willamette.edu
2006-08-22 19:27:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juan Valdez
The only reason mass literacy hadn't been tried, was
because scholars felt the peasants weren't 'ready.'
OK, so can you name some people who were pushing for a mass literacy
programs in China in the 1860's and 1870's? And if not, then Wong
would be pushing for something that no one else particularly cared for,
pretty much out of the blue, wouldn't he? If we're going to go that
route, why don't we just have him institute a massive public health
program based upon the early works of Louis Pasteur while we are at it?
Post by Juan Valdez
How 'bout the problems w/ illiterate troops during the Taiping? Perhaps
he incrementally builds mass literacy. Maybe he starts thinking in
terms of troop force multipliers to reduce logistical burdens of
supply huge, inefficient armies?
That's a possible way for a mass literacy program to get it's
foundation, but if that _foundation_ begins in the 1860's or so, then
the mass literacy program is not going to be on a nationwide scale for
a few decades after that, which was what I was saying we should have
happen.
Post by Juan Valdez
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Perhaps he could push for it at the end of his life? That wouldn't
help China as much of course, but by the 1880's and 1890's far more
countries will have adopted mass literacy as a way of life and it would
appear to be a more obvious route to modernization than it would have
in the 1860's.
OTL's Chinese history shows that moderate reforms made a huge net
impact. If he starts in the 1860s, then by the 1880s he's got a
whole generation of young literate men
My whole point was that it's unrealistic to have him start a nationwide
program (which is what he'd need for a "whole generation of young
literate men) in the 1860's.
Post by Juan Valdez
?? Wong only needs to give China a modern army, bureaucracy, and
civil society to make it pretty much invulnerable to any land war
against any of the other great powers.
That is an awfully big "only." (Which is kind of the point of this
thread.)

--
Mike Ralls
Rich Rostrom
2006-08-21 22:41:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
So. What can Emperor Wong do? Is China screwed regardless? Or can he
launch a more effective course of modernization than iOTL?
I don't see how Wong can do worse than the
Dowager did OTL.

Also, ISTM China had a lot of strength
left in the mid-1800s. Overcoming the
Tai Ping wasn't a cakewalk.

The question, to my mind, is can Wong
get a Meiji/Kemalist current started:
persuade large numbers of Chinese,
especially the educated and/or wealthy
and/or powerful that Chinese national
power is best served by acknowledging
China's weaknesses ASAP and moving at
once to remedy them by learning
Western methods.

I don't see any _material_ reason why
China could not industrialize as fast
as Japan in 1860-1910; and China is
vastly larger.

Anything would be better than the
grudging and reluctant acceptance
of the bare minimum of change as
dictated by Old Buddha.
--
| He had a shorter, more scraggly, and even less |
| flattering beard than Yassir Arafat, and Escalante |
| never conceived that such a thing was possible. |
| -- William Goldman, _Heat_ |
Rich Rostrom
2006-08-21 22:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Revisiting a discussion with Joe Wang, back in 1999.
19th century China was screwed a bunch of different ways. Can we fix
this? Let's try.
[handwave] I give China a Great Man.
I still like my take on this.

WI this Great Man was Fred T. Ward?

OK, OTL Ward never even learned Chinese.

But he was created a grade-three mandarin.
and the Chinese government respected him
enough to build a small temple in his
memory.

He wouldn't be the first foreigner to
become Emperor.

And he could have learned Chinese and
assimilated more than he did.

I see his rise as similar to your Emperor
Wong - except that I have him allied with
Tseng Kuo-fan, the greatest of the Empire's
anti-insurgent commanders in the 1800s.

They march on Peking together, after the
Dowager tries to have them killed. Tseng
is wounded and sick afterwards, though -
and there was a near-miraculous escape
from assassins (Fred quick-shot two of
them while pushing Tseng to cover on the
floor) that gave a lot of people the
impression that Fred just might have the
favor of Heaven.

Fred's Chinese son (he was married to a
Shanghai merchant's daughter) will marry
Tseng's grand-daughter, shoring up the
dynasty...

Yankee energy and China's resources: yow!
--
| He had a shorter, more scraggly, and even less |
| flattering beard than Yassir Arafat, and Escalante |
| never conceived that such a thing was possible. |
| -- William Goldman, _Heat_ |
d***@hushmail.com
2006-08-22 02:00:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich Rostrom
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Revisiting a discussion with Joe Wang, back in 1999.
19th century China was screwed a bunch of different ways. Can we fix
this? Let's try.
[handwave] I give China a Great Man.
I still like my take on this.
WI this Great Man was Fred T. Ward?
OK, OTL Ward never even learned Chinese.
But he was created a grade-three mandarin.
and the Chinese government respected him
enough to build a small temple in his
memory.
He wouldn't be the first foreigner to
become Emperor.
Hmm. there have been foreign leaders who have become Emperor, and
there have been leaders of (usually Han) insurgents/rebels who became
Emperor, but AFAIK there has never been both at once. OTOH there's a
first time for everything.
Post by Rich Rostrom
And he could have learned Chinese and
assimilated more than he did.
I see his rise as similar to your Emperor
Wong - except that I have him allied with
Tseng Kuo-fan, the greatest of the Empire's
anti-insurgent commanders in the 1800s.
And therein lies the challenge--Zeng Guofan was above all a loyal
mandarin--this was part of the reason he was trusted to raise a
standing army (a generation later, the leaders of these regional armies
would become less loyal to the Qing state, but not in Zeng's time). If
Zeng believed that the Ever-Victorious Army was a threat to the Qing
state, he would turn the "Hunan Braves" against them.
Post by Rich Rostrom
They march on Peking together, after the
Dowager tries to have them killed. Tseng
is wounded and sick afterwards, though -
and there was a near-miraculous escape
from assassins (Fred quick-shot two of
them while pushing Tseng to cover on the
floor) that gave a lot of people the
impression that Fred just might have the
favor of Heaven.
I can quibble with the plausibility, but I can't complain about the
fun.
However, a question: why would the people think *Ward,* not *Zeng*, has
the favor of heaven?
Rich Rostrom
2006-08-24 19:59:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@hushmail.com
Post by Rich Rostrom
I see his rise as similar to your Emperor
Wong - except that I have him allied with
Tseng Kuo-fan, the greatest of the Empire's
anti-insurgent commanders in the 1800s.
And therein lies the challenge--Zeng Guofan was above all a loyal
mandarin--this was part of the reason he was trusted to raise a
standing army (a generation later, the leaders of these regional armies
would become less loyal to the Qing state, but not in Zeng's time). If
Zeng believed that the Ever-Victorious Army was a threat to the Qing
state, he would turn the "Hunan Braves" against them.
See the next sentence. Was Tseng so loyal that
he would hold still while the Dowager cut his
throat?
Post by d***@hushmail.com
Post by Rich Rostrom
They march on Peking together, after the
Dowager tries to have them killed. Tseng
is wounded and sick afterwards, though -
and there was a near-miraculous escape
from assassins (Fred quick-shot two of
them while pushing Tseng to cover on the
floor) that gave a lot of people the
impression that Fred just might have the
favor of Heaven.
I can quibble with the plausibility, but I can't complain about the
fun.
However, a question: why would the people think *Ward,* not *Zeng*, has
the favor of heaven?
Because Ward is young, energetic, charismatic,
and has miraculously survived a long series of
perils to rank with, oh, Fidel Castro's.

And because Tseng says so. He's old, sick,
tired - he can't do it. He's impressed by
Ward personally, by Ward's leadership of
troops in the march, even more by Ward's good
fortune in surviving the perils mentioned
above.

It was Ward, not Tseng, who held the pass with
500 men against 12,000 Tai Pings, Ward who led
the storming party over the walls of Nanking,
Ward who blew in the gates of Tsinan, Ward who
jumped off a burning gunboat in the Hwang Ho
seconds before the magazines blew, Ward who
returned from battle unscratched with 14 bullet
holes in his robes (the number increasing at
every retelling, till it reaches three figures).

It was Ward who spotted the dead Imperial officer
who had papers on him locating a vast money
hoard; et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

To paraphrase Rocky Marciano,

Somebody Up There likes him.

And once he gets the reputation, rumor will
happily build on it.

Tseng might still prefer his own son - but
(waves hands vigorously) said son was killed
by the Dowager's assassins. (Idunno _anything_
about Tseng's family, which makes such hand-
waving easy.)

OK, I'm reaching - _way_ reaching - but it's
it's _fun_.

As for the follow-on.

Ward cements his reign by standing up to the
Europeans a few years later over opium. Britain
sends an expedition, which Ward's reformed and
re-equipped troops defeat and capture in entirety.

Britain is forced to renounce not only opium
but its treaty ports. Vast numbers of Chinese
cheer patriotically.
--
| He had a shorter, more scraggly, and even less |
| flattering beard than Yassir Arafat, and Escalante |
| never conceived that such a thing was possible. |
| -- William Goldman, _Heat_ |
m***@willamette.edu
2006-08-22 19:14:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich Rostrom
WI this Great Man was Fred T. Ward?
It would be considerably harder for a European to become Emperor and
Modernizer of China than it would be for a Chinese man to do so. So,
if we're looking for ways to have China have a better 19th century,
it's best to have the Great Man be Chinese.

--
Mike Ralls
Tim McDaniel
2006-08-22 00:25:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
I know dreadfully little about China. What was wrong with a silver
standard? What alternative would you suggest?
--
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: ***@panix.com
JBodi
2006-08-22 01:47:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Revisiting a discussion with Joe Wang, back in 1999.
19th century China was screwed a bunch of different ways. Can we fix
this? Let's try.
[handwave] I give China a Great Man.
[snip]
First a nit - dynasty names tended to be allusive or territorial names
('Song' and 'Han' were regions), not family names. Names are important
though ...

If our boy's from the Yangzi valley, how about "Wu", the name of a
pre-imperial power of the area? (There's another 'wu' character that
means 'martial' but that may not go down so well with the chattering
classes.)

So our guy'd have the temple name of Wu Taizu, 'grand progenitor of the
Wu', with a reign title like 'Restoring* Virtue**' (according to me
cribbing ignorantly from Mote that should come out "Fude", and
ignorance hasn't stopped me before).

I'm going to suggest that we make him a scholar first, general
second*** because his biggest task is going to be to carry the
mandarins and literati with him in his reforms**** Wong the gifted
scholar who took up arms to preserve the dynasty, and reluctantly ended
up rescuing the Son of Heaven from evil ministers starts out with an
advantage in legitimacy.

Wu Fude placed first in the imperial exams, the literati will say. Wu
Fude was offered a post in Beijing but turned it down to mourn his
father for three years. Wu Fude beat the long-hairs and I bet he'd have
beat the red-hairs too if Cixi had let him. Wu Fude can cite chapter
and verse from the classics in favour of his reforms AND he can
out-argue the old wheezes from the Hanlin Academy into the bargain AND
his calligraphy rocks. This will generate enthusiasm among the
younger, educated, under-employed literati that he needs to staff his
reformed civil service. It will also lend legitimacy to reforms in the
examination and education system.

Mass literacy isn't, I think, as big a leap as all that, I think
there'd been winter schools for boys and temple / lineage schools for
some time. If he limits it to basic literacy and technical subjects for
the most part, the mandarins might not even be too obstructive.

Army reform, check. A professional, properly paid central army with
even moderately improved training, firearms and artillery would go a
long way to giving the foreign devils pause. And the need for a better
army is going to be hard for anyone to miss, after Elgin comes to town.

National assembly I'm not so sure of (and don't know anything about
provincial assemblies). Why would he think it's necessary or
desirable? I mean, the Tudors had to call Parliament to get revenue in;
he doesn't. However, on that same tack - suppose he starts at the
bottom and regularizes the collective-responsibility system? He
establishes formal county councils composed of the local scholar-gentry
and makes them responsible for tax collection, tax transmission and
expenditure on county issues (schools, granaries, poor relief, police,
temples, bridges etc). The purpose is to take weight off the poor
county magistrate, who is moved to strictly audit, report / supervision
and judicial functions. This formalizes self-government functions that
already existed and in so doing, allows the idea of representative
government to grow naturally.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
...time. How will the western powers, in the golden age of
imperialism, respond to a China that's serious about reform? How much
maneuvering room will Wong have?
Is he farsighted enough to play them off against each other?
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Which brings us back to the central question: 19th century China --
totally screwed, or not?
It could be less screwed than OTL.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Thoughts?
Doug M.
s***@yahoo.com
2006-08-22 12:14:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by JBodi
First a nit - dynasty names tended to be allusive or territorial names
('Song' and 'Han' were regions), not family names. Names are important
though ...
Good point, and I do like "Restoring Virtue". Still... any way to keep
Wong (or Wang)?
Post by JBodi
I'm going to suggest that we make him a scholar first, general
second*** because his biggest task is going to be to carry the
mandarins and literati with him in his reforms**** Wong the gifted
scholar who took up arms to preserve the dynasty, and reluctantly ended
up rescuing the Son of Heaven from evil ministers
Interesting. I was coming at it the opposite way: a general with an
unexpected flair for administration, like Napoleon. But maybe this
works better.
Post by JBodi
Wu Fude placed first in the imperial exams, the literati will say. Wu
Fude was offered a post in Beijing but turned it down to mourn his
father for three years. Wu Fude beat the long-hairs and I bet he'd have
beat the red-hairs too if Cixi had let him. Wu Fude can cite chapter
and verse from the classics in favour of his reforms AND he can
out-argue the old wheezes from the Hanlin Academy into the bargain AND
his calligraphy rocks. This will generate enthusiasm among the
younger, educated, under-employed literati that he needs to staff his
reformed civil service. It will also lend legitimacy to reforms in the
examination and education system.
Very interesting. Again, I was coming at it from the other side: the
new Emperor Wong WILL see these reforms carried through. And if it
means a lot of mandarins end up in Outer Mongolia, so be it. But your
version is much more sophisticated.

One problem: OTL, the late Qin system seems to have been set up to keep
the best and brightest away from power. Look at the period 1850-1910
in particular, and you see very few brilliant or even competent minds
in the top levels of the military or civil service. Lots and lots of
time-servers. Of course, this was hardly unique to China... you could
look at contemporary Czarist Russia and it's almost as bad, with the
likes of Witte and Stolypin as rule-proving exceptions. But anyway:
this raises the question, is your scenario plausible? I like it, but
does it really work in the context of mid-19th century Qin China?

Mind, it's also possible that the new Emperor (or someone close to him)
has a genius for PR. In which case, it doesn't matter if it's true or
not!
Post by JBodi
Mass literacy isn't, I think, as big a leap as all that, I think
there'd been winter schools for boys and temple / lineage schools for
some time. If he limits it to basic literacy and technical subjects for
the most part, the mandarins might not even be too obstructive.
Mudsills and greasy mechanics, baby.
Post by JBodi
Army reform, check. A professional, properly paid central army with
even moderately improved training, firearms and artillery would go a
long way to giving the foreign devils pause. And the need for a better
army is going to be hard for anyone to miss, after Elgin comes to town.
OTL they got it, but the Self-Strengthening Movement was slow to get
off the ground. It did produce real results, but a little too little
and a little too late.
Post by JBodi
National assembly I'm not so sure of (and don't know anything about
provincial assemblies). Why would he think it's necessary or
desirable? I mean, the Tudors had to call Parliament to get revenue in;
he doesn't.
This is a bit of a jump, I admit. There's no Chinese precedent. The
European models should be at least interesting, though. The new
Emperor certainly won't imagine the Assembly should have real power;
rather, he'd see it as (1) an additional source of legitimacy (always
an issue with new dynasties), and (2) a way to bring sharp minds in
from the provinces.

Hm. OTL the Japanese decided to create a Parliament in 1881. They
went about it very methodically, though -- sent a fact-finding mission
to travel around Europe and the US. The constitution was promulgated
in 1889, first elections to the new Diet were in 1890.

Hard to see the Chinese going much faster than that; and Wong (or Wu)
will be leaving the picture sometime in the early 1880s.

Well... say the Emperor starts with a Ministry of Talents. But the
mandarins kick at the pricks -- who are these provincial nobodies?
Next step, some sort of council of notables drawn from all over the
Empire, more judicial than parliamentary but with some power to propose
edicts for Imperial consideration.

Let us assume Wong's eldest son succeeds around 1883. A grown man when
father took the throne, he is now in his forties. He may or may not be
competent, but put that aside for now; I think it's at least plausible
that he'd be open to borrowing from European models. Remember, new
dynasty; has to be conservative and creative at the same time.
Post by JBodi
Is he farsighted enough to play them off against each other?
He's farsighted enough to try. But note that Anglo-French rivalry will
drop off sharply after 1871, and life will get more complicated
generally as the other powers (Germany, Russia, Japan) come online in
the 1880s.


Doug M.
JBodi
2006-08-23 01:48:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
First a nit - dynasty names tended to be allusive or territorial names
('Song' and 'Han' were regions), not family names. Names are important
though ...
Good point, and I do like "Restoring Virtue". Still... any way to keep
Wong (or Wang)?
Blast, my last response went to bit hell. He could have either as his
family name. 'Wang' would have both good connotations (Anshi) and bad
ones (Mang).
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
I'm going to suggest that we make him a scholar first, general
second*** because his biggest task is going to be to carry the
mandarins and literati with him in his reforms**** Wong the gifted
scholar who took up arms to preserve the dynasty, and reluctantly ended
up rescuing the Son of Heaven from evil ministers
Interesting. I was coming at it the opposite way: a general with an
unexpected flair for administration, like Napoleon. But maybe this
works better.
Post by JBodi
Wu Fude placed first in the imperial exams, the literati will say. Wu
Fude was offered a post in Beijing but turned it down to mourn his
father for three years. Wu Fude beat the long-hairs and I bet he'd have
beat the red-hairs too if Cixi had let him. Wu Fude can cite chapter
and verse from the classics in favour of his reforms AND he can
out-argue the old wheezes from the Hanlin Academy into the bargain AND
his calligraphy rocks. This will generate enthusiasm among the
younger, educated, under-employed literati that he needs to staff his
reformed civil service. It will also lend legitimacy to reforms in the
examination and education system.
Very interesting. Again, I was coming at it from the other side: the
new Emperor Wong WILL see these reforms carried through. And if it
means a lot of mandarins end up in Outer Mongolia, so be it. But your
version is much more sophisticated.
To a point. Some will get exiled, some sliced. Some he can co-opt and
some he can divert into harmless prestige projects.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
One problem: OTL, the late Qin system seems to have been set up to keep
the best and brightest away from power. Look at the period 1850-1910
in particular, and you see very few brilliant or even competent minds
in the top levels of the military or civil service. Lots and lots of
time-servers. Of course, this was hardly unique to China... you could
look at contemporary Czarist Russia and it's almost as bad, with the
this raises the question, is your scenario plausible? I like it, but
does it really work in the context of mid-19th century Qin China?
Maybe. He needs to refresh the system from the ranks who were
excluded. There's lots of them, luckily and he can swamp the old guard
if he can figure out a way to pay for the new posts. Time servers can
be co-opted, and some can be sliced pour discourager les autres. It's
the principled reactionaries that will cause him problems, I think.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Mind, it's also possible that the new Emperor (or someone close to him)
has a genius for PR. In which case, it doesn't matter if it's true or
not!
Post by JBodi
Mass literacy isn't, I think, as big a leap as all that, I think
there'd been winter schools for boys and temple / lineage schools for
some time. If he limits it to basic literacy and technical subjects for
the most part, the mandarins might not even be too obstructive.
Mudsills and greasy mechanics, baby.
With a healthy dollop of 'respect mah authoritah' thrown in because
it's fun for the mandarins.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
Army reform, check. A professional, properly paid central army with
even moderately improved training, firearms and artillery would go a
long way to giving the foreign devils pause. And the need for a better
army is going to be hard for anyone to miss, after Elgin comes to town.
OTL they got it, but the Self-Strengthening Movement was slow to get
off the ground. It did produce real results, but a little too little
and a little too late.
His military background helps here: he knows what's needed and what
will work in the field, and it's not marble boats.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
National assembly I'm not so sure of (and don't know anything about
provincial assemblies). Why would he think it's necessary or
desirable? I mean, the Tudors had to call Parliament to get revenue in;
he doesn't.
This is a bit of a jump, I admit. There's no Chinese precedent. The
European models should be at least interesting, though. The new
Emperor certainly won't imagine the Assembly should have real power;
rather, he'd see it as (1) an additional source of legitimacy (always
an issue with new dynasties), and (2) a way to bring sharp minds in
from the provinces.
Hm. OTL the Japanese decided to create a Parliament in 1881. They
went about it very methodically, though -- sent a fact-finding mission
to travel around Europe and the US. The constitution was promulgated
in 1889, first elections to the new Diet were in 1890.
Hard to see the Chinese going much faster than that; and Wong (or Wu)
will be leaving the picture sometime in the early 1880s.
Well... say the Emperor starts with a Ministry of Talents. But the
mandarins kick at the pricks -- who are these provincial nobodies?
Next step, some sort of council of notables drawn from all over the
Empire, more judicial than parliamentary but with some power to propose
edicts for Imperial consideration.
Thing is, lots of mandarins can memorialize him as it is: why encourage
them to act together? Legitimacy comes from heaven, after all. But
collaberation is fun, so ... okay, the beltway crowd doesn't like his
hayseeds. Seems there's a problem with selection and promotion then.
Reforming that is something that would need the legitimacy of a broad
base of support. Assemble notables - hell, let the county councils
nominate their best. Put them to work reforming the examination
system. Not, he assures them, to replace it, oh no, and the Four Books
are sacrosanct, but surely we can agree the exam subjects and responses
have gotten a little stilted? A little narrow? And then he finds that
the assembly is a good place to let the old guard have their say and to
train up his young turks. So when the new exam system is rolled out he
decides the fiscal system needs work, and when that's done, water
management. By the time that's done the assembly is practically
permanent and the emperor is used to acting on its advice, and, pehaps,
leaning on it as he gets older.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Let us assume Wong's eldest son succeeds around 1883. A grown man when
father took the throne, he is now in his forties. He may or may not be
competent, but put that aside for now; I think it's at least plausible
that he'd be open to borrowing from European models. Remember, new
dynasty; has to be conservative and creative at the same time.
He could do, it would be more respectable by that time. Or he could
fight it, which is a better way to get it to grow into a real
legislature.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
Is he farsighted enough to play them off against each other?
He's farsighted enough to try. But note that Anglo-French rivalry will
drop off sharply after 1871, and life will get more complicated
generally as the other powers (Germany, Russia, Japan) come online in
the 1880s.
Here's a thought: use the Japanese as allies against the Tsar, who's
the weak sister of the lot. Also, use the Japanese as a spur to his
people.

Gonna be difficult to avoid at least one losing encounter with angry
redhairs though.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Doug M.
Coyu
2006-08-24 11:08:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by JBodi
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
First a nit - dynasty names tended to be allusive or territorial names
('Song' and 'Han' were regions), not family names. Names are important
though ...
Good point, and I do like "Restoring Virtue". Still... any way to keep
Wong (or Wang)?
Blast, my last response went to bit hell. He could have either as his
family name. 'Wang' would have both good connotations (Anshi) and bad
ones (Mang).
Um. Wang/Wong ain't going to fly for the name of any dynasty. It means
'king'. Which, in Chinese terms, is much less than 'emperor'.

Roughly: Ming = 'luminous', Yuan = 'empowered', Qing = 'clear', with
the Germanic sense of -klar-.

Doug, before you ask, Xin = 'new' would be right out (see James Bodi's
mention of Wang Mang for why).

James, while I like your idea of "Wu", I think at this point in Chinese
history, ancient regional names would smack of non-universal sentiment.
What does Wu mean to Chu?
JBodi
2006-09-06 02:31:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by JBodi
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
First a nit - dynasty names tended to be allusive or territorial names
('Song' and 'Han' were regions), not family names. Names are important
though ...
Good point, and I do like "Restoring Virtue". Still... any way to keep
Wong (or Wang)?
Blast, my last response went to bit hell. He could have either as his
family name. 'Wang' would have both good connotations (Anshi) and bad
ones (Mang).
Um. Wang/Wong ain't going to fly for the name of any dynasty. It means
'king'. Which, in Chinese terms, is much less than 'emperor'.
Right - this was family, not dynasty name.
Post by Coyu
Roughly: Ming = 'luminous', Yuan = 'empowered', Qing = 'clear', with
the Germanic sense of -klar-.
Doug, before you ask, Xin = 'new' would be right out (see James Bodi's
mention of Wang Mang for why).
James, while I like your idea of "Wu", I think at this point in Chinese
history, ancient regional names would smack of non-universal sentiment.
What does Wu mean to Chu?
(Sorry this is late - been away)

Yeah, you're probably right (unless we try 'Lu' for the association
with Confucius and also because they never beat up anyone).

Okay, in the concept-style dynasty names, we have 'bright' and 'clear',
but I'm afraid that 'occasional showers' won't do for the next one.

There's 'Fu' mentioned earlier, for 'restoration'; 'Shun' as in
compliant with heaven but I think that might be tainted as a failed
rebellion name; 'Wen' for 'cultured' as in the opposite of 'martial'
but it sounds kinda smarmy to me, for an ex-general.
d***@hushmail.com
2006-09-07 06:23:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by JBodi
There's 'Fu' mentioned earlier, for 'restoration'; 'Shun' as in
compliant with heaven but I think that might be tainted as a failed
rebellion name; 'Wen' for 'cultured' as in the opposite of 'martial'
but it sounds kinda smarmy to me, for an ex-general.
How bout another one of the two characters that comprises "zhengfu,"
government?
c***@hushmail.com
2006-08-24 15:50:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by JBodi
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
First a nit - dynasty names tended to be allusive or territorial names
('Song' and 'Han' were regions), not family names. Names are important
though ...
Good point, and I do like "Restoring Virtue". Still... any way to keep
Wong (or Wang)?
Blast, my last response went to bit hell. He could have either as his
family name. 'Wang' would have both good connotations (Anshi) and bad
ones (Mang).
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
I'm going to suggest that we make him a scholar first, general
second*** because his biggest task is going to be to carry the
mandarins and literati with him in his reforms**** Wong the gifted
scholar who took up arms to preserve the dynasty, and reluctantly ended
up rescuing the Son of Heaven from evil ministers
Interesting. I was coming at it the opposite way: a general with an
unexpected flair for administration, like Napoleon. But maybe this
works better.
Post by JBodi
Wu Fude placed first in the imperial exams, the literati will say. Wu
Fude was offered a post in Beijing but turned it down to mourn his
father for three years. Wu Fude beat the long-hairs and I bet he'd have
beat the red-hairs too if Cixi had let him. Wu Fude can cite chapter
and verse from the classics in favour of his reforms AND he can
out-argue the old wheezes from the Hanlin Academy into the bargain AND
his calligraphy rocks. This will generate enthusiasm among the
younger, educated, under-employed literati that he needs to staff his
reformed civil service. It will also lend legitimacy to reforms in the
examination and education system.
Very interesting. Again, I was coming at it from the other side: the
new Emperor Wong WILL see these reforms carried through. And if it
means a lot of mandarins end up in Outer Mongolia, so be it. But your
version is much more sophisticated.
To a point. Some will get exiled, some sliced. Some he can co-opt and
some he can divert into harmless prestige projects.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
One problem: OTL, the late Qin system seems to have been set up to keep
the best and brightest away from power. Look at the period 1850-1910
in particular, and you see very few brilliant or even competent minds
in the top levels of the military or civil service. Lots and lots of
time-servers. Of course, this was hardly unique to China... you could
look at contemporary Czarist Russia and it's almost as bad, with the
this raises the question, is your scenario plausible? I like it, but
does it really work in the context of mid-19th century Qin China?
Maybe. He needs to refresh the system from the ranks who were
excluded. There's lots of them, luckily and he can swamp the old guard
if he can figure out a way to pay for the new posts. Time servers can
be co-opted, and some can be sliced pour discourager les autres. It's
the principled reactionaries that will cause him problems, I think.
And this would be something with strong precedent from Chinese history
and philosophy. The period of Confucius, slightly before, was the time
when the rulers shifted away from feudalism of hereditary vassal
officials, and started to promote officialdom from ranks of petty
nobles, on basis of merit/education. A lot of PR went to justifying
this... roughly, it was with Song 1500 years later that hereditary
great aristocracy was finally shoved to background.

The Chinese scholar-gentry had managed to restrict their circles to
relatively well-off landowners by the end of Ming. But they would have
PR difficulties theoretically defending themselves against a ruler
seeking to undermine them by trying to promote educated peasantry to
similar status.
Post by JBodi
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Mind, it's also possible that the new Emperor (or someone close to him)
has a genius for PR. In which case, it doesn't matter if it's true or
not!
Post by JBodi
Mass literacy isn't, I think, as big a leap as all that, I think
there'd been winter schools for boys and temple / lineage schools for
some time. If he limits it to basic literacy and technical subjects for
the most part, the mandarins might not even be too obstructive.
Mudsills and greasy mechanics, baby.
With a healthy dollop of 'respect mah authoritah' thrown in because
it's fun for the mandarins.
A point about winter schools and temple/lineage schools had been that
these were private undertakings supported by wealthy gentry. By so
doing, the gentry allied with the peasantry against the formal state
machinery and taxes - held out some hope of advancement through merit
to those just below it.

Establishing a network of state schools would undermine precisely this
alliance - the hope of education would come from State appointees, not
private patrons...
Post by JBodi
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
Army reform, check. A professional, properly paid central army with
even moderately improved training, firearms and artillery would go a
long way to giving the foreign devils pause. And the need for a better
army is going to be hard for anyone to miss, after Elgin comes to town.
OTL they got it, but the Self-Strengthening Movement was slow to get
off the ground. It did produce real results, but a little too little
and a little too late.
His military background helps here: he knows what's needed and what
will work in the field, and it's not marble boats.
You could have him start with pacifying the restless countryside of
Taiping Rebellion precisely by establishing a peasant militia that
doubles as schools. This would show that the military are not thugs,
but educated, morally cultivated people capable of understanding and
obeying orders, who by their service become more educated that the
other peasants.
Post by JBodi
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
National assembly I'm not so sure of (and don't know anything about
provincial assemblies). Why would he think it's necessary or
desirable? I mean, the Tudors had to call Parliament to get revenue in;
he doesn't.
This is a bit of a jump, I admit. There's no Chinese precedent. The
European models should be at least interesting, though. The new
Emperor certainly won't imagine the Assembly should have real power;
rather, he'd see it as (1) an additional source of legitimacy (always
an issue with new dynasties), and (2) a way to bring sharp minds in
from the provinces.
Hm. OTL the Japanese decided to create a Parliament in 1881. They
went about it very methodically, though -- sent a fact-finding mission
to travel around Europe and the US. The constitution was promulgated
in 1889, first elections to the new Diet were in 1890.
Hard to see the Chinese going much faster than that; and Wong (or Wu)
will be leaving the picture sometime in the early 1880s.
Well... say the Emperor starts with a Ministry of Talents. But the
mandarins kick at the pricks -- who are these provincial nobodies?
King John ordered sheriffs to send representative knights from shires
before Magna Carta. This was long before Montfort offered
representation... the barons had tried to rule by purely their own
councils in early and mid-13th century.

It would make sense to invite representatives of midlevel provincial
officials to assemblies for advice and information, as well as
disseminating important policies and PR. After all, inviting provincial
governors or the full sets of subordinates for advice would leave too
few people on the spot in command.

Again, this kind of assemblies might even start as war councils,
representing armies on field against taipings and officials/notables
from regions under martial law/being pacified...
Post by JBodi
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Next step, some sort of council of notables drawn from all over the
Empire, more judicial than parliamentary but with some power to propose
edicts for Imperial consideration.
Judicial would be pointless. The Emperors had long asserted the power
to try and punish individual wrongdoers and resolve private disputes.

Whereas the Emperor might offer proposed edicts for discussion and
allow the assembly to propose amendments (But he could well refuse to
allow votes and personally decide for/against based on the arguments
given).

And of course, the point of the assembly could be to allow local
notacles to bring complaints against/snitch on their governors and
other officials. The representatives could be specifically asked to
collect and present grievances from their localities, like "cahiers de
doleances" of French Estates General. In which case it would be
important not to let the governors pack their province´ s delegation
with their clients intent on hiding their misdeeds.
Post by JBodi
Thing is, lots of mandarins can memorialize him as it is: why encourage
them to act together? Legitimacy comes from heaven, after all. But
collaberation is fun, so ... okay, the beltway crowd doesn't like his
hayseeds. Seems there's a problem with selection and promotion then.
Reforming that is something that would need the legitimacy of a broad
base of support. Assemble notables - hell, let the county councils
nominate their best. Put them to work reforming the examination
system. Not, he assures them, to replace it, oh no, and the Four Books
are sacrosanct, but surely we can agree the exam subjects and responses
have gotten a little stilted? A little narrow? And then he finds that
the assembly is a good place to let the old guard have their say and to
train up his young turks. So when the new exam system is rolled out he
decides the fiscal system needs work, and when that's done, water
management. By the time that's done the assembly is practically
permanent and the emperor is used to acting on its advice, and, pehaps,
leaning on it as he gets older.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Let us assume Wong's eldest son succeeds around 1883. A grown man when
father took the throne, he is now in his forties. He may or may not be
competent, but put that aside for now; I think it's at least plausible
that he'd be open to borrowing from European models. Remember, new
dynasty; has to be conservative and creative at the same time.
He could do, it would be more respectable by that time. Or he could
fight it, which is a better way to get it to grow into a real
legislature.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Post by JBodi
Is he farsighted enough to play them off against each other?
He's farsighted enough to try. But note that Anglo-French rivalry will
drop off sharply after 1871, and life will get more complicated
generally as the other powers (Germany, Russia, Japan) come online in
the 1880s.
Here's a thought: use the Japanese as allies against the Tsar, who's
the weak sister of the lot. Also, use the Japanese as a spur to his
people.
Gonna be difficult to avoid at least one losing encounter with angry
redhairs though.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Doug M.
k***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2006-08-22 14:22:13 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by s***@yahoo.com
...time. How will the western powers, in the golden age of
imperialism, respond to a China that's serious about reform?
How much maneuvering room will Wong have?
Well the US was pushing the open door policy, and the UK was
mainly interested in trade. If he ignored the various foreign
enclaves and actually enforced trade law on Chinese as wells as
foreign merchants I doubt he would have major problems except
with Russia and Japan. Russia was expanding in Turkestan and
Japan was seriously interested in Korea. Tibet was another
problem, the Tibetans wanted independence, the Russians wanted in
and the UK wanted to keep the Russians out. Uk worries about
Russia resulted in Younghusband in 1904.

Ken Young
Coyu
2006-08-24 11:11:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
Serious question: why? (Assuming you mean 'abolish' by 'fix'.)
Juan Valdez
2006-08-25 01:04:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
Serious question: why? (Assuming you mean 'abolish' by 'fix'.)
Seems he was arguing that since Europe was on the gold standard, and
since China would need to trade with Europe (I disagree w/ this
contention for at least a few decades), it would behoove it to get on
gold.

I ask again, why not paper money? To rebut those who say it creates
inflation, I respond- is that so bad in an undermonetized economy? At
least people who never had access to capital would get it. Merchants
and moneylenders would quickly create a national equilibrium of
inflation
by trading w/ low inflation markets. That wouldn't take long. Then we
have a central government that can deal with large transactions in
paper-
maybe even letters, a la halwa? Banks are key to this enterprise, and
I think China easily has enough capital concentration and knowhow to
make it happen.

The real power of paper money comes in stimulating trade in places
where specie is scarce. Suddenly, all assets in the economy can be
leveraged, and the cost of funds isn't determined by the availibility
of specie. As the central government gets better at making paper
money, it will be able to mobilize the huge resources China still
possessed.

The government backs currency with its treasury. If the Emperor can
live with not owning everything between the four seas then maybe even
the palace art objects.

There will be forgery and inflationary disasters but the government
will handle it with the bigger civil service. Eventually, policing
will improve- perhaps through a tax and money police?

Metals based currencies don't back the value of their currency with
all national assets, because the money supply is contingent upon
the economy's ability to keep specie in and moving through an economy.
If there is less metal than asset value, it will be impossible to
leverage the value of all assets which chokes growth more assuredly
than inflation imo.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Coyu
2006-08-25 09:38:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juan Valdez
Post by Coyu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
Serious question: why? (Assuming you mean 'abolish' by 'fix'.)
Seems he was arguing that since Europe was on the gold standard, and
since China would need to trade with Europe (I disagree w/ this
contention for at least a few decades), it would behoove it to get on
gold.
Well, I will wait for Doug to answer, but I'll point out that the gold
standard was not standard for Europe (or the United States) until
the fourth quarter of the nineteenth century.
Post by Juan Valdez
I ask again, why not paper money? To rebut those who say it creates
inflation, I respond- is that so bad in an undermonetized economy? At
least people who never had access to capital would get it.
You're conflating several different things here: access to capital,
stimulating a demonetized economy, and inflationary pressure caused
by over-issuing paper money.

A demonetized economy does need some form of tokens to make exchange
function more smoothly. Historically, small coins of little intrinsic
value have accomplished this role: pennies, or in the Chinese world,
'cash'. Jonathan Swift wrote essays about this.

However, linking the value of these tokens to an inflationary paper
currency is dangerous.

Now, paper currency has its own problems in the situation Doug is
postulating. For one thing, no government at the time has the
expertise needed. It's a little bizarre to think that China will be
able to come up with the local talent to do so (however, stranger
things have happened).

Second, a new government with problems of legitimacy -- such as a
dynastic transition -- will require much larger reserves to back
their paper currency. At a sign of crisis, many people will
exchange their notes for metal (if allowed to). Why not simply
issue the metal in the first place?

Third, the government currency is the _government_ currency. It
will be difficult to enforce its use throughout China, especially
in areas where it would be difficult to exchange for metal. Civil
servants may be paid in paper currency out in the boonies, but
what will they be able to buy with it?

Basically, the idea of backed paper notes requires a much stronger
banking system than the Chinese state had at this point, and one
that would cover most of the country.
Post by Juan Valdez
There will be forgery and inflationary disasters but the government
will handle it with the bigger civil service. Eventually, policing
will improve- perhaps through a tax and money police?
If the Chinese state was capable of this level of law enforcement,
it would not have had this sort of dynastic succession.
s***@yahoo.com
2006-08-25 11:34:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Well, I will wait for Doug to answer, but I'll point out that the gold
standard was not standard for Europe (or the United States) until
the fourth quarter of the nineteenth century.
Yeah, but the silver standard had some unique problems.

Silver tended to drift into China up until the 1830s. That's because
China was exporting much more than it was importing, and would only
accept silver in payment. The amount of silver in circulation in China
probably grew faster than the economy, but not grossly so, so inflation
doesn't seem to have been a problem.

Then in the 1830s, things changed very fast. One, opium imports took
off. Two, Chinese exports to the rest of Asia -- especially India --
began to crash as cheaper British manufactured goods took over. We
think of China as exporting tea, porcelain and silks, and that's true,
but they were also the yarn-spinners, cloth-makers, and garment
manufacturers for half the world... until the British elbowed them
aside.

So, suddenly silver began flowing out instead of in. This led to
/de/flation. And it was even worse than you might think, because taxes
had to be paid in silver, but most peasant commerce was in copper. So,
a peasant would sell his rice for copper cash; but every year, he'd
need more and more copper to buy enough silver to pay the tax
collector. This was one of the reasons the Taiping Rebellion caught on
so fast and went on so long.

Then, starting in the 1870s, things changed again. China was still
running a huge trade deficit, but silver was falling in value around
the world (partly because of new silver mines, partly because the
developed world was moving to the gold standard). So silver started
drifting back into China. Well and good, except that this led to
inflation.

(OTL Qing China was able to partly ameliorate this by introducing
machine-stamped coinage... by drastically reducing the cost of creating
money, this gave a one-time windfall, allowing them to put more money
in circulation without devaluing. Which is why China shifted from
hand-stamped to machine-stamped coins quite amazingly fast; it happened
piecemeal, as one provincial mint after another took up the practice,
but was complete within a decade or so. Our hypothetical Wong/Wu
dynasty could bring it in a little early.)

So, the silver standard, not all that. I'm not sure going to the gold
standard would be much better, and I agree that the time's not right
for paper currency. But "the alternatives are bad" doesn't mean "what
we have is good".


Doug M.
Noel
2006-08-25 12:32:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Then, starting in the 1870s, things changed again. China was still
running a huge trade deficit, but silver was falling in value around
the world (partly because of new silver mines, partly because the
developed world was moving to the gold standard). So silver started
drifting back into China. Well and good, except that this led to
inflation.
---Source? Data, I think, is needed here. The key
data would be on the real exchange rate.

Note that inflation is not always a bad thing. In an
economy like China, and in a situation where the in-
flation is not a sign of an underlying political risk, I
can imagine several channels in which it would be
downright positive.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
So, the silver standard, not all that. I'm not sure going to the gold
standard would be much better, and I agree that the time's not right
for paper currency. But "the alternatives are bad" doesn't mean "what
we have is good".
---That confuses things, it seems to me. With only
three options on the table (gold-based reserve currency,
silver-based reserve currency, and fiat currency), there
is no difference for the purposes of this discussion be-
tween "what we have is good" and "the alternatives are
worse."

Best,

Noel
Coyu
2006-08-25 14:08:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
(OTL Qing China was able to partly ameliorate this by introducing
machine-stamped coinage... by drastically reducing the cost of creating
money, this gave a one-time windfall, allowing them to put more money
in circulation without devaluing. Which is why China shifted from
hand-stamped to machine-stamped coins quite amazingly fast; it happened
piecemeal, as one provincial mint after another took up the practice,
but was complete within a decade or so. Our hypothetical Wong/Wu
dynasty could bring it in a little early.)
Yes, I was thinking of this. One of the (many) reasons why the
Ming's monetary situation was so peculiarly troubled resulted
from high minting costs.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
So, suddenly silver began flowing out instead of in. This led to
/de/flation. And it was even worse than you might think, because taxes
had to be paid in silver, but most peasant commerce was in copper. So,
a peasant would sell his rice for copper cash; but every year, he'd
need more and more copper to buy enough silver to pay the tax
collector. This was one of the reasons the Taiping Rebellion caught on
so fast and went on so long.
That's a problem of bimetallism, not a silver standard per se.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Then, starting in the 1870s, things changed again. China was still
running a huge trade deficit, but silver was falling in value around
the world (partly because of new silver mines, partly because the
developed world was moving to the gold standard). So silver started
drifting back into China. Well and good, except that this led to
inflation.
Um. I don't have the figures at hand, but considering that China
was still largely an agricultural society in the 1870s, only
loosely connected to the business cycle, I am going to guess that
the inflationary shocks produced by poor harvests are going to
affect Chinese society far more than quantity-driven inflation.

Inflation will also not necessarily be a bad thing in a
countryside filled with debt.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
So, the silver standard, not all that. I'm not sure going to the gold
standard would be much better, and I agree that the time's not right
for paper currency. But "the alternatives are bad" doesn't mean "what
we have is good".
I'm trying to think of an immediate gain for China adopting the
gold standard. China did not produce gold. China had little gold
reserves. The local gold/silver ratio would shift, causing a
glut of silver, causing that inflationary trend you were worried
about. This will lower the silver/copper ratio, but official
taxes will now have to be paid in gold, and you've very nicely
explained how that turned out to be a bad idea with regards to
the Taiping.

It gets them on board with the UK -- ahead of such backwards
nations as Germany and the US -- but what advantages that gives
to China, other than happy memorandums sent to Whitehall by
some British consul, isn't really obvious.
Noel
2006-08-25 16:50:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
It gets them on board with the UK -- ahead of such backwards
nations as Germany and the US -- but what advantages that gives
to China, other than happy memorandums sent to Whitehall by
some British consul, isn't really obvious.
---There is still some debate about this, but you can
make a good case that adopting the gold standard
would significantly lower the cost of capital for the
Chinese government and companies making invest-
ments in Chinese infrastructure.

Bordo, et. al.

If true, this could have very significant effects on
Chinese economic development.

Best,

Noel
Coyu
2006-08-25 18:13:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Noel
Post by Coyu
It gets them on board with the UK -- ahead of such backwards
nations as Germany and the US -- but what advantages that gives
to China, other than happy memorandums sent to Whitehall by
some British consul, isn't really obvious.
---There is still some debate about this, but you can
make a good case that adopting the gold standard
would significantly lower the cost of capital for the
Chinese government and companies making invest-
ments in Chinese infrastructure.
Bordo, et. al.
I know the interwar result, but does it apply to the initial
formation of the classical gold standard as well?

For the General Wang's China case, let's bracket it. Any
drop should be between the drop in the cost of capital for
Japan, when it goes on the gold standard in 1897, and the
drop for the Ottoman Empire, when it makes its transition
in the 1880s.
Post by Noel
If true, this could have very significant effects on
Chinese economic development.
Hm. Let's assume Doug's Taiping model is correct -- that
an increase in the copper cash/official coinage ratio will
cause state revenues to decline.

I think you see where I am going with this.
Noel
2006-08-25 21:34:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by Noel
Post by Coyu
It gets them on board with the UK -- ahead of such backwards
nations as Germany and the US -- but what advantages that gives
to China, other than happy memorandums sent to Whitehall by
some British consul, isn't really obvious.
---There is still some debate about this, but you can
make a good case that adopting the gold standard
would significantly lower the cost of capital for the
Chinese government and companies making invest-
ments in Chinese infrastructure.
Bordo, et. al.
I know the interwar result, but does it apply to the initial
formation of the classical gold standard as well?
---Interwar is where it /didn't/ happen. "The Gold Standard
as a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" applies to 1870-
1914. After the war, suddenly being on gold didn't cause
interest rates to drop. The reverse, in fact.

There's still a debate about why, however. Was it an epi-
phenomenon caused by the European tendency to invade
defaulting countries? (Probably not.) An elimination of
currency risk with no effect on sovereign risk? Etcetera.
Either way, it's fairly safe to assume that a gold standard
China could borrow more cheaply; another thing to say that
it would borrow more, or use the proceeds wisely.
Post by Coyu
For the General Wang's China case, let's bracket it. Any
drop should be between the drop in the cost of capital for
Japan, when it goes on the gold standard in 1897, and the
drop for the Ottoman Empire, when it makes its transition
in the 1880s.
Post by Noel
If true, this could have very significant effects on
Chinese economic development.
Hm. Let's assume Doug's Taiping model is correct -- that
an increase in the copper cash/official coinage ratio will
cause state revenues to decline.
I think you see where I am going with this.
---Yup. Hmmm. De facto fiat money?

Best,

Noel
Coyu
2006-08-26 08:30:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Noel
Post by Coyu
Post by Noel
---There is still some debate about this, but you can
make a good case that adopting the gold standard
would significantly lower the cost of capital for the
Chinese government and companies making invest-
ments in Chinese infrastructure.
Bordo, et. al.
I know the interwar result, but does it apply to the initial
formation of the classical gold standard as well?
---Interwar is where it /didn't/ happen. "The Gold Standard
as a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" applies to 1870-
1914. After the war, suddenly being on gold didn't cause
interest rates to drop. The reverse, in fact.
Argh. Braino.
Post by Noel
There's still a debate about why, however. Was it an epi-
phenomenon caused by the European tendency to invade
defaulting countries? (Probably not.) An elimination of
currency risk with no effect on sovereign risk? Etcetera.
Either way, it's fairly safe to assume that a gold standard
China could borrow more cheaply; another thing to say that
it would borrow more, or use the proceeds wisely.
Post by Coyu
For the General Wang's China case, let's bracket it. Any
drop should be between the drop in the cost of capital for
Japan, when it goes on the gold standard in 1897, and the
drop for the Ottoman Empire, when it makes its transition
in the 1880s.
Post by Noel
If true, this could have very significant effects on
Chinese economic development.
Hm. Let's assume Doug's Taiping model is correct -- that
an increase in the copper cash/official coinage ratio will
cause state revenues to decline.
I think you see where I am going with this.
---Yup. Hmmm. De facto fiat money?
I think... I think that General Wong will be cautious here.
The following I think would fit his worldview, be acceptable
to most Western financial advisors, and not do obvious harm.

a) establish a sound modern silver coinage.

b) establish an official token 'copper' [1] coinage with a
fixed fiat exchange rate with the silver coinage. It's not
the metal content that determines value here.

b1) The price point should tilt slightly to the side of
generosity, if possible. This isn't about short-term revenue
enhancement.

c) distribute distribute. In practice, this will mean giving
money-changers a quasi-official role in the government. Keep
this association limited. Ideally, this should be a function
of the mint, but here the best is enemy of the good enough.

c1) a system of assayers _should_ be officialized, and
Western-trained as soon as possible.

c2) generous amnesty and grace period.

d) do not touch the bills-of-exchange people, unless they
are engaging in fraud. Some of them will likely have helped
you on your rise to power; do not reward them with business
privileges. Plenty of other ways.

e) the Bank of China project. Among other things, this would
be the place to start with the gold notes and gold reserve.

Probably some other things as well, but this is a start.

[1] OTL's numismatic evidence shows that the Chinese were
using copper-zinc alloys several hundred years before the US.
The Horny Goat
2006-08-25 15:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by Juan Valdez
Post by Coyu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
Serious question: why? (Assuming you mean 'abolish' by 'fix'.)
Seems he was arguing that since Europe was on the gold standard, and
since China would need to trade with Europe (I disagree w/ this
contention for at least a few decades), it would behoove it to get on
gold.
Well, I will wait for Doug to answer, but I'll point out that the gold
standard was not standard for Europe (or the United States) until
the fourth quarter of the nineteenth century.
Post by Juan Valdez
I ask again, why not paper money? To rebut those who say it creates
inflation, I respond- is that so bad in an undermonetized economy? At
least people who never had access to capital would get it.
Juan wasn't the only one scratching his head concerning why silver
currency would have been a problem. Given what I've read about China
in that period there seems no question in my mind that silver coins
would have been more acceptable that paper money.

Presumably the argument is based on international trade but if gold is
required to do international trade, which was only true to a partial
extent, it would be far easier to exchange silver for it than paper.
Post by Coyu
Now, paper currency has its own problems in the situation Doug is
postulating. For one thing, no government at the time has the
expertise needed. It's a little bizarre to think that China will be
able to come up with the local talent to do so (however, stranger
things have happened).
Second, a new government with problems of legitimacy -- such as a
dynastic transition -- will require much larger reserves to back
their paper currency. At a sign of crisis, many people will
exchange their notes for metal (if allowed to). Why not simply
issue the metal in the first place?
Very true on both points.
Post by Coyu
If the Chinese state was capable of this level of law enforcement,
it would not have had this sort of dynastic succession.
Best point of all.

My first thought when reading the point about silver was the likely
effect on Wm. Jennings Bryan. But I don't think the point about the
need to change the currency has been demonstrated at all.
mike
2006-08-25 15:39:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Basically, the idea of backed paper notes requires a much stronger
banking system than the Chinese state had at this point, and one
that would cover most of the country.
You mean a Federal Bank system, or more like the early US efforts
with nearly every early local Bank doing its own script that may or may
not
be backed by Metal or Ag products even, and unrelated to the
Greenback: yet seemed to work fairly well until the West Silver&Gold
mines&Greenbacks and ACW screwed that all up. Or Church even: IIRC
the Mormons issued their own for awhile.

Chinese Paper Monastery[1] Money if Silver Sycee was hard to
get, parallel with the Imperial Silver Yuen? If that Paper is more
convertable from Copper or Rice, It should be popular, even if it
don't trade 100% to Silver


[1] maybe Missionary Script? Would Methodist Dollars be worth more
Southern Baptist or Presbyterian?

**
mike
**
Coyu
2006-08-25 17:09:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by mike
Post by Coyu
Basically, the idea of backed paper notes requires a much stronger
banking system than the Chinese state had at this point, and one
that would cover most of the country.
You mean a Federal Bank system, or more like the early US efforts
with nearly every early local Bank doing its own script that may or may
not be backed by Metal or Ag products even, and unrelated to the
Greenback: yet seemed to work fairly well until the West Silver&Gold
mines&Greenbacks and ACW screwed that all up. Or Church even: IIRC
the Mormons issued their own for awhile.
I'm thinking a banking system better than Crazy Chang's Pawnshop
and Dimsum Hut. The modern bank as we know it was very late in
entering China. (Shanghai became China's financial center because
foreign banks in the Bund filled that niche, e.g. HSBC.) What
existed until the late Qing was mainly an array of money changers,
pawnshops, assayers, and loan sharks. Some of them were very
sophisticated at the transaction level. But institutionally, they
were quite primitive.
mike
2006-08-25 19:46:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
I'm thinking a banking system better than Crazy Chang's Pawnshop
and Dimsum Hut. The modern bank as we know it was very late in
entering China.
You could almost say the same about the USA for the 1st hundred years,
with the Local private Banks Vs the National Bank with Jackson.
Or Scotland, even, when the local notes didn't always have to be
exchanged for Metal, and the Bank of England wasn't the sole issuer
of notes till the 1850s

Sure, a Federalized system would be great, but is it really needed to
improve over the Imperial setup China had? a strong Province bank
setup would be fine, plus the isolation if one should fail, vs problems
with a National Bank system. Like I said, the US system early on
wasn't that far removed from the loanshark& currency speculators
roots that were so abundant prior the 1879? Act going on the gold
standard
that cleared out so many private banks.

**
mike
**
Coyu
2006-08-25 20:38:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by mike
Post by Coyu
I'm thinking a banking system better than Crazy Chang's Pawnshop
and Dimsum Hut. The modern bank as we know it was very late in
entering China.
You could almost say the same about the USA for the 1st hundred years,
with the Local private Banks Vs the National Bank with Jackson.
Or Scotland, even, when the local notes didn't always have to be
exchanged for Metal, and the Bank of England wasn't the sole issuer
of notes till the 1850s
Different set-up. The issuance of coinage and currency was
explicitly a state function, and the penalty for a private
individual to do so could be death, same as any other type of
counterfeiting, even if they could back it up.

This did not prevent the issuance of an enormous amount of
private coin, which quickly became debased. But fiat notes had
a higher place in the official hierarchy -- they were symbolic
to the state, almost like a passport. Private bills of
exchange were OK, but you had to convert them to the actual
product, and then to specie, to make official payments.
mike
2006-08-25 23:58:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Different set-up. The issuance of coinage and currency was
explicitly a state function, and the penalty for a private
individual to do so could be death,
A lot of things were: a really comon punishment vs the West, it seems.
Could the new Emperor change this to liberalize things abit
Post by Coyu
same as any other type of
counterfeiting, even if they could back it up.
Would this change alone be enough to take the brakes off
and avoid the deflation problem, if those lenders had a State
Licence to print privat notes, with requirement on capital on hand,
converability to Sycee,etc?

**
mike
**
Coyu
2006-08-26 08:50:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by mike
Post by Coyu
Different set-up. The issuance of coinage and currency was
explicitly a state function, and the penalty for a private
individual to do so could be death,
A lot of things were: a really comon punishment vs the West, it seems.
Yes&no. This cut to the heart of the definition of the power
of the state: declare a piece of paper to have value equal to
such-and-such, simply by fiat. Only the state, through the
emperor, had that power.
Post by mike
Would this change alone be enough to take the brakes off
and avoid the deflation problem, if those lenders had a State
Licence to print privat notes, with requirement on capital on hand,
converability to Sycee,etc?
Probably an easier path would be to slowly work the bills-of-
exchange people -- the "Shanxi banks", which weren't, quite --
into the state system.

But carefully; it would be so easy to be confiscatory. Probably
the time to have license and deposit requirements would be
after the inevitable panic. But even there, I suspect it would
be a good idea, poorly executed.

The easiest path would be to ignore the Shanxi banks, except
in cases of fraud. Laissez-faire except for violation of
contract.

This shifts the enforcement costs to the local magistrates,
which is problematic in its own way; but ultimately, that's a
known problem of hiring and paying qualified civil servants,
with known solutions. (Which may or may not be implementable,
but that's another story.)
s***@yahoo.com
2006-08-27 16:16:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by mike
Post by Coyu
the penalty for a private
individual to do so could be death,
A lot of things were: a really comon punishment vs the West, it seems.
Could the new Emperor change this to liberalize things abit
Probably not at first, though we might see a change-of-dynasty pardon.
I think that part of the reason so many crimes were capital is that the
state was weak. No police, and Imperial power ended at the country
level. Imperial magistrates had broad powers of investigation, but
there were far too few of them. This is one reason the late Qing was a
paradise for organized crime.

So, if the odds of a criminal getting caught are small, it makes sense
for the State to crank up the penalties if he is.

Anyway. The minutiae of currency reform are fascinating -- really --
but does anyone want to go back to the meta-question? "19th century
China: Screwed or what?"

I'm cautiously inclined to think that Emperor Wu is arranging the deck
chairs on the Titanic, but I'm really not sure yet. Would like to hear
from those better informed.


Doug M.
Coyu
2006-08-27 23:03:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Anyway. The minutiae of currency reform are fascinating -- really --
Dude.
Post by s***@yahoo.com
but does anyone want to go back to the meta-question? "19th century
China: Screwed or what?"
I'm cautiously inclined to think that Emperor Wu is arranging the deck
chairs on the Titanic, but I'm really not sure yet. Would like to hear
from those better informed.
Let me talk this out. Traditional Chinese theories of political
legitimacy do not have much room for popular representation. (The
collection of public opinion, yes.) The ideal was something very
much like the managerial state, but deriving derived its legitimacy
through the person of the emperor, who derived his legitimacy
through quasi-religious rites to maintain the cosmic order. In
theory an autocracy, but with explicit checks and balances through
the consciences of individual administrators.

Now, your Emperor Wu has come to power traditionally. To maintain
his power, he will have to operate under the above strictures. So
far nothing new. You're postulating an exceptional individual, who
might be able to buck the system somewhat. But this isn't a general
catastrophe, the way the Ming-Qing transition was. This is rather
closer to a coup d'etat after a prolonged period of civil unrest.

In my opinion he would have to be traditionalist enough for the
interest groups who require it among his supporters. Who those
will be will be contingent on fine details -- the 'minutiae' -- of
your scenario.

In the same way, reformers bringing Western political ideas will
find themselves in opposition to Emperor Wu, simply because they
delegitimize his transfer to the throne, _even if he thinks they
are good ideas_.

However, your Emperor Wu came to power via a military background.
There is a simple and obvious model that he has immediately at
hand, one that actually fits within the Qing tradition: military
regimentation to introduce new reforms. And he has a contemporary
Western example: Prussia, the Qin of Germany.

Implementation will be interesting.

Incidentally, as a general note: you're starting this guy in what,
1870 or so? Let's assume another 14 years of relative peace. We
assume Wu can make China 2% more 'effective' than OTL per annum --
this balances the chaos caused by the dynastic change with OTL's
Empress Cixi's conservatism and ineptitude.

This takes us to the Sino-French war. China is 30% more effective
than OTL (whatever that means). This is probably enough either to
allow the French protectorate of Annam to go off without a hitch,
perhaps as a shrewd diplomatic move by Emperor Wu, in return for
modernization and trade; or for the Chinese to decisively win on
land (the Chinese fleet probably still gets sunk, but the Taiwan
garrison might put up a defense).

Let's move forward to the Sino-Japanese war. (Yes, I know how
inextricably it's tied up with Qing meddling in Korea.) China is
now 60% more effective than OTL. It's not looking so much like
the sick man of east Asia, although it still has a nasty cough.
Both the Beiyang and the Nanyang armies have nice shiny spikes
on their helmets, and shoes. There's a guy named Yuan Shikai who
learned everything St. Cyr had to teach him about artillery.
Also, he has shells. And the sailors in the navy aren't pawning
their buttons for gambling money. Well, most of them.

(And let's say it's still a crushing defeat for China! Is China
still significantly better off under Emperor Wu? Or were the
last twenty-four years just moving the deck chairs around.)
b***@eve.albany.edu
2006-08-27 23:17:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Let's move forward to the Sino-Japanese war. (Yes, I know how
inextricably it's tied up with Qing meddling in Korea.) China is
now 60% more effective than OTL. It's not looking so much like
the sick man of east Asia, although it still has a nasty cough.
Both the Beiyang and the Nanyang armies have nice shiny spikes
on their helmets, and shoes. There's a guy named Yuan Shikai who
learned everything St. Cyr had to teach him about artillery.
Also, he has shells. And the sailors in the navy aren't pawning
their buttons for gambling money. Well, most of them.
(And let's say it's still a crushing defeat for China! Is China
still significantly better off under Emperor Wu? Or were the
last twenty-four years just moving the deck chairs around.)
So how more effective than OTL does China have to be to have at least
even odds of pulling off a victory? An "honorable loss/pyrric victory
for the Japanese"?

Bruce
Coyu
2006-08-27 23:53:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@eve.albany.edu
Post by Coyu
Let's move forward to the Sino-Japanese war. (Yes, I know how
inextricably it's tied up with Qing meddling in Korea.) China is
now 60% more effective than OTL. It's not looking so much like
the sick man of east Asia, although it still has a nasty cough.
Both the Beiyang and the Nanyang armies have nice shiny spikes
on their helmets, and shoes. There's a guy named Yuan Shikai who
learned everything St. Cyr had to teach him about artillery.
Also, he has shells. And the sailors in the navy aren't pawning
their buttons for gambling money. Well, most of them.
(And let's say it's still a crushing defeat for China! Is China
still significantly better off under Emperor Wu? Or were the
last twenty-four years just moving the deck chairs around.)
So how more effective than OTL does China have to be to have at least
even odds of pulling off a victory? An "honorable loss/pyrric victory
for the Japanese"?
Um. I think the Chinese forces OTL, if competently run, could have
done the latter. I'm more interested in exploring this concept of
"shifting deck chairs on the Titanic" with respect to late Imperial
China. It's an evocative metaphor, but.
d***@hushmail.com
2006-09-04 03:59:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by b***@eve.albany.edu
So how more effective than OTL does China have to be to have at least
even odds of pulling off a victory? An "honorable loss/pyrric victory
for the Japanese"?
Um. I think the Chinese forces OTL, if competently run, could have
done the latter.
! That's a bold claim--especially if you mean "the Chinese forces OTL
that participated in the war" rather than "all the Chinese forces
possibly available." Defend it?
Coyu
2006-09-04 12:52:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@hushmail.com
Post by Coyu
Post by b***@eve.albany.edu
So how more effective than OTL does China have to be to have at least
even odds of pulling off a victory? An "honorable loss/pyrric victory
for the Japanese"?
Um. I think the Chinese forces OTL, if competently run, could have
done the latter.
! That's a bold claim--especially if you mean "the Chinese forces OTL
that participated in the war" rather than "all the Chinese forces
possibly available." Defend it?
Sure, with the proviso that I read that as "honorable loss for the
Chinese / pyrrhic victory for the Japanese".

Setting aside the Chinese naval conduct of the war, which is probably
irredeemable, the casualty ratios for the Sino-Japanese war were often
insanely unbalanced, over a hundred to one for some battles. It strikes
me that there is some room for improvement in terms of competency here.

You start tweaking that number downwards -- in the famous cartoon 'and
then a miracle occurs' manner; but having the Chinese troops not panic
and run at the first shot might help -- and the Japanese start running
into some problems.

Bringing it to five to one -- still deeply unbalanced, no? -- and you
get something that looks more like the Russo-Japanese war. Still a
Chinese loss, but not exactly the overwhelming victory for the Japanese
of our history, which even so left Japan exhausted. I am not sure how
the alternate Treaty of Shimonoseki and aftermath will play out.

If I had to pick two particular points for China to step up (as opposed
to systemic magic pixie dust improvement overall), I would choose the
defense at the Yalu, and the defense of Port Arthur.
Juan Valdez
2006-08-28 21:46:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Incidentally, as a general note: you're starting this guy in what,
1870 or so? Let's assume another 14 years of relative peace. We
assume Wu can make China 2% more 'effective' than OTL per annum --
this balances the chaos caused by the dynastic change with OTL's
Empress Cixi's conservatism and ineptitude.
Thought it was something like 1865 myself- Wu being the dissatisfied
General relocated to Hangkow- or maybe that's too close to Beijing.
In any case, the General seeing he's been kicked to the curb makes
his move. Exhausted Qing don't put up much fight and Wu's got it in
1866.

As for 'effective,' I don't get it. China had ~12% of global
manufacturing ~1880. Military effectiveness improves pretty quickly
once the state's ready to reform it. Getting the state organs healthy
is another matter. I look at it like this:
1865-1870 Wu is improving his control of the state- likely doing so
through the military. This means he's going to maximize tax collection
to feed the military. Furthermore, since it's a dynastic shift, there
will be the fortunes of officials gone into disfavor during the
transition. Chang Chu-Cheng had more riches than the Wan-li Emperor.
Armories and arms factories pop up to build modern arms for the
military. Surely some Yankee, Scottish, or French engineer would
build the facility for the right price.
1870-1875: More arms, more drill instructors, make for a fearsome
army. Emperor at this point would now have enough power to make a
big reform stick- mebbe currency and taxation reform.
Post by Coyu
This takes us to the Sino-French war. China is 30% more effective
than OTL (whatever that means). This is probably enough either to
allow the French protectorate of Annam to go off without a hitch,
perhaps as a shrewd diplomatic move by Emperor Wu, in return for
modernization and trade; or for the Chinese to decisively win on
land (the Chinese fleet probably still gets sunk, but the Taiwan
garrison might put up a defense).
Elephant vs Whale. Draw.
Post by Coyu
(And let's say it's still a crushing defeat for China! Is China
still significantly better off under Emperor Wu? Or were the
last twenty-four years just moving the deck chairs around.)
In 24 years, China only needs to get Beijing, Hangkow, and Zhanjiang
modern. Those supply centers can then support a military that helps
enforces the Emperor's will by fiat. China imo IOTL had the resources
to do military dictatorship, but didn't. If he can be pursuaded to
modernize banking, so much the better. If not though, I think a state
that had its act together- with no additional GDP growth, could still
have played its hand much more effectively than the Qing did IOTL.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
m***@willamette.edu
2006-08-28 20:26:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Anyway. The minutiae of currency reform are fascinating -- really --
but does anyone want to go back to the meta-question? "19th century
China: Screwed or what?"
Question: Would a stronger government under Wong go about building
infrastructure like railroads or roads on a level that could produce a
notable national effect on everything from the economy to national
unity? Or is that too much of a cart-before-the-horse solution for
19th century China?

--
Mike Ralls
Juan Valdez
2006-08-29 16:07:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@willamette.edu
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Anyway. The minutiae of currency reform are fascinating -- really --
but does anyone want to go back to the meta-question? "19th century
China: Screwed or what?"
Question: Would a stronger government under Wong go about building
infrastructure like railroads or roads on a level that could produce a
notable national effect on everything from the economy to national
unity? Or is that too much of a cart-before-the-horse solution for
19th century China?
Seems to me the Emperor suffers from a shortage of military 'C's:
Command, control, communication. The emperor is isolated performing the
rites that legitimize his reign. If he rejects this role, will he be
able to effectively command the civil service and get them to do his
will? A military might not be enough to persuade 'reformers' into
carrying out the Emperor's edicts, but what do I know?

This discussion seems to be pushing our Wu dynasty into
a 19th century Russia trap. Sad. So Wu builds armories and factories
for his army. Maybe even some rails and telegraphs. Does he need to
build that command infrastructure from scratch or can he get the
civil service on board? Either way, ok, we've got a Chinese
state with pockets of modernity- split between the civil service and
the emperor.

I feel like I'm charging at windmills here re: the economy. China's
got way more assets than specie, but we can't seem to leverage those
assets because there's not enough specie. That in turn puts less goods
and services into play which in turn means China continues to suffer
from OTL's 19th c financial problems.

Noel suggested affinity networks might not be so bad in the short
term. Does that mean our missing link here is the Triad? IOTL,
because magistrates were always being moved around and it was almost
impossible to get a good performance review, gangs would often help
serve as a magistrate's eyes and ears.

Perhaps effective (or at least loyal) civil servants don't get moved
so much and establish longer term relationships with their prefectures.
This makes them more corrupt, but it also perhaps helps when it comes
to enforcing contracts and other obliged performances.

Still, that would require a state prepared to issue and enforce
legal instruments, and perhaps Wu is less interested in the intangibles
of governing, and more interested in the articles of raw power.

Without viable currency reforms, I'd have to vote it's possible
19th century China's screwed. With some reforms, and China could at
least be a bigger Russia- a big, sloppy, modernish army with a barely
functioning civil service. If there's some way for Japan, Korea, and
China to play nicely together, we could see some incremental reforms
from each and perhaps they copy each other.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
The Horny Goat
2006-08-26 02:24:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by mike
You mean a Federal Bank system, or more like the early US efforts
with nearly every early local Bank doing its own script that may or may
not be backed by Metal or Ag products even, and unrelated to the
Greenback: yet seemed to work fairly well until the West Silver&Gold
mines&Greenbacks and ACW screwed that all up. Or Church even: IIRC
the Mormons issued their own for awhile.
I'm thinking a banking system better than Crazy Chang's Pawnshop
and Dimsum Hut. The modern bank as we know it was very late in
entering China. (Shanghai became China's financial center because
foreign banks in the Bund filled that niche, e.g. HSBC.) What
existed until the late Qing was mainly an array of money changers,
pawnshops, assayers, and loan sharks. Some of them were very
sophisticated at the transaction level. But institutionally, they
were quite primitive.
The early history of HSBC is indeed very interesting. As
http://www.hsbc.com/hsbc/news_room/news/news-archive-2004?cp=/public/groupsite/news_room/2004_archive/hsbc_publishes_new_brief_history_of_the_group.jhtml&isPc=true
points out, most banking type transactions involving trade were done
by European trading houses.

The above document is quite interesting and besides much I did know (I
didn't bother reading after 1949) I learned that the Peninsular and
Oriental Steam Navigation Company was involved in the 1865 founding of
what is now HSBC. Obviously the above company is better known by its
initials. There's a possible WI there if someone wants to run with it.
I was equally surprised to find that for a long time HSBC had a
controlling interest in the Hang Seng bank since they are the #2 bank
in Hong Kong today. (Most of my Hong Kong suppliers bank with one of
these two companies) There's another possible WI for someone.

What surprised me is that the issue of banknotes was a key part of
HSBC pretty much from the beginning in 1865 which touches on the
recent discussion here. Perhaps a faster growing HSBC or other company
could have produced a banknote that dominated China as a whole in much
the same way that Hong Kong today is dominated by banknotes produced
by HSBC and Hang Seng.

[The HK government paper does issue their own paper money but that is
very small by comparison. Coins up to HK$10 are still a government
monopoly however - what is interesting is that in 2003-2004 the
government of Hong Kong ran short of coins and resorted to
re-releasing some of the pre-1997 coins that they had had in storage.
These of course feature you know who on the obverse side though the
bahinia flower had been on the reverse side for several years before
1997 and remains on most HK coins today.]

Another thing that surprises me is that HSBC was always more Hong Kong
rather than Shanghai oriented (1) - I had thought that that was a
post-1949 move but clearly I was very very wrong. Certainly the
1941-45 period of the corporate history describes the sufferings of
the mostly British executives of the company under Japanese rule.

(1) Before I believe this too completely though I would prefer a
non-HSBC source since there is of course all kinds of opportunity for
"spin" here.
Juan Valdez
2006-08-28 21:17:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by mike
Post by Coyu
Basically, the idea of backed paper notes requires a much stronger
banking system than the Chinese state had at this point, and one
that would cover most of the country.
You mean a Federal Bank system, or more like the early US efforts
with nearly every early local Bank doing its own script that may or may
not be backed by Metal or Ag products even, and unrelated to the
Greenback: yet seemed to work fairly well until the West Silver&Gold
mines&Greenbacks and ACW screwed that all up. Or Church even: IIRC
the Mormons issued their own for awhile.
I'm thinking a banking system better than Crazy Chang's Pawnshop
and Dimsum Hut. The modern bank as we know it was very late in
entering China. (Shanghai became China's financial center because
foreign banks in the Bund filled that niche, e.g. HSBC.) What
existed until the late Qing was mainly an array of money changers,
pawnshops, assayers, and loan sharks. Some of them were very
sophisticated at the transaction level. But institutionally, they
were quite primitive.
Basic banking services aren't too complicated. Loans are mostly
interest only and the real problem is enforcing contracts. That's where
affinity networks come in, but they work against banking. We need the
state to recover this function- that gets back to Doug's question
downthread of the original question- is 19th c. China screwed even
with new Wu? I think there's a simple solution.

State storehouses become exchanges. The minister of the storehouse
sets the official rate of exchange, mindful of Emperor's tax
collection goals. Storehouses collect the state's requirements for
various goods (sesames, iron ore, wood, rice, etc.). By providing an
official, semi-reliable exchange rate, barter can be converted into
paper records- proto-commodities exchange if you will. They were almost
there anyhow, by just setting collection quotas, you turn storehouses
into the tax collector, banker, moneychanger, barter, and commodities
market. Han-Lin academy comes up with standardized accounting practices
and thus auditing becomes easier.

Crazy Chang needs to specialize after this.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Coyu
2006-08-29 09:17:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juan Valdez
Basic banking services aren't too complicated.
Developmentally, this has not been the case.
Post by Juan Valdez
Loans are mostly
interest only and the real problem is enforcing contracts. That's where
affinity networks come in, but they work against banking. We need the
state to recover this function- that gets back to Doug's question
downthread of the original question- is 19th c. China screwed even
with new Wu? I think there's a simple solution.
State storehouses become exchanges. The minister of the storehouse
sets the official rate of exchange, mindful of Emperor's tax
collection goals.
Um. This combines the bad idea of the marketing board with the bad
idea of agricultural commodity standards in a global market. If
memory serves, Nkrumah did something very similar with cacao in
Ghana. It did not work very well.
Noel
2006-08-29 12:02:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Coyu
Post by Juan Valdez
Basic banking services aren't too complicated.
Developmentally, this has not been the case.
Post by Juan Valdez
Loans are mostly
interest only and the real problem is enforcing contracts. That's where
affinity networks come in, but they work against banking.
---There is work on this issue (if I understand what you
mean by "affinity contracts") in another context that
suggests otherwise, at least in the medium term.

Over to somebody else familiar with the literature.

Best,

Noel
Coyu
2006-08-29 13:28:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juan Valdez
Han-Lin academy comes up with standardized accounting practices
and thus auditing becomes easier.
Incidentally, these weren't introduced into the American
financial sector until the 1930s.

Also, by the 1870s, it would be like asking the Al-Azhar Mosque
to come up with a revision to Linnean taxonomy.
k***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2006-08-26 10:23:50 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Coyu
Basically, the idea of backed paper notes requires a much
stronger banking system than the Chinese state had at this
point, and one that would cover most of the country.
On the other hand there was a precedent for using paper
currency. From what I remember of "Life in Early Imperial China"
the Han issued a paper currency. The book also mentioned various
attempts to get large value coins into circulation.

Ken Young
Tzintzuntzan
2006-09-07 14:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Revisiting a discussion with Joe Wang, back in 1999.
19th century China was screwed a bunch of different ways. Can we fix
this? Let's try.
[handwave] I give China a Great Man.
POD: 1815, a male child is born to a family of wealthy landowners in
central China. Young Wong will grow up to be a more-than-competent
general, a more-than-competent administrator, and very very clever and
farsighted.
By the 1840s, he's an ambitious young general under the Qing... but
the real difference isn't seen until the 1860s, when General Wong wins
a couple of major victories over the Taiping, bringing that rebellion
to a swifter end than in OTL. Luckily for him, he's busy killing
Taipings when the Franco-British army arrives in Peking and burns the
palace, so he's not tainted with that defeat.
Wong keeps winning battles, the Dowager Empress tries to have him
removed or killed, and he ends up marching north, victorious army in
tow, and overthrowing the Qing.
Others more knowledgable than me have commented on the economic
side, so one quick comment: this does sound a lot like the OTL
Li Hungzhang, if Li had the nerve to overthrow the dynasty. Without
the Empress Dowager screwing things up, he can really get to work.
Not only none of her reactionary policies, but none of her scheming
and sabotaging the court to prevent any threats to her. However, Li
was also very corrupt (although not, perhaps, more corrupt
than usual for his time), and hopefully Wong isn't.

There hasn't been much discussion of how Wong will deal with the
foreign devils, which makes me wonder. I've heard that Li decided
that resisting them was pointless. His reasoning was that sooner
or later they'd leave, so the important thing was to survive and wait
a few decades until they were gone -- while spending most of the
military might on holding on to Central Asia, which was not going
to leave. Would Hong decide the same?

OTOH, I learned this from a professor of Mongolian history,
who may have an inflated opinion of how vital Central Asia
was to the Qing.
TXZZ
2006-09-12 04:26:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
Revisiting a discussion with Joe Wang, back in 1999.
19th century China was screwed a bunch of different ways. Can we fix
this? Let's try.
[handwave] I give China a Great Man.
POD: 1815, a male child is born to a family of wealthy landowners in
central China. Young Wong will grow up to be a more-than-competent
general, a more-than-competent administrator, and very very clever and
farsighted.
By the 1840s, he's an ambitious young general under the Qing... but
the real difference isn't seen until the 1860s, when General Wong wins
a couple of major victories over the Taiping, bringing that rebellion
to a swifter end than in OTL. Luckily for him, he's busy killing
Taipings when the Franco-British army arrives in Peking and burns the
palace, so he's not tainted with that defeat.
Wong keeps winning battles, the Dowager Empress tries to have him
removed or killed, and he ends up marching north, victorious army in
tow, and overthrowing the Qing.
Track #1: Wong simply overthrows the Qing, claims the Mandate of
Heaven, and declares a new Wong Dynasty.
Problem: Wong is soon fighting Emperors Chang, Li, and Wu. Once the
Qing is overthrown everything is up for grabs, and all of the generals
are going to want to be emperor.
This leads to an "earlier warlordism in China" TL. That's interesting,
but it's not what we want here. So we shift to
Track #2: Wong takes out the Dowager Empress. OTL a couple of royal
princes, I and Cheng, just barely missed getting rid of her when the
Emperor died in 1861. They nearly got her, twice, but in the end she
turned the tables on them and they got the silk cord.
So let's have General Wang succeed where the princes failed, and remove
Empress Cixi from the board. Now he can rule as Regent from 1865 to
1873, when the young Emperor dies of natural causes just as in OTL. He
can then formally take the throne without undue difficulty.
At this point Wong is in his early fifties, so probably good for
another 15 or 20 years. We'll say he has a couple of healthy young
adult sons, so the succession is assured. Let's assume that, other
than the Taipings having been crushed rather faster than in OTL, the
China he inherits is identical to the China of OTL.
So. What can Emperor Wong do? Is China screwed regardless? Or can he
launch a more effective course of modernization than iOTL?
1) Push for mass literacy. 19th century China was more literate than
you might think, but the modal Chinese was still an illiterate or
semiliterate peasant living near subsistence level. The Japanese laid
the foundation of modernization with mass primary education; China
should do the same.
There may be some resistance to this among the peasants (the kids are
needed in the fields) but that's what the Mandate of Heaven is for.
2) Reform the army, obviously. He may have gotten a head start on
this already. Note that the army need not be brought up to Western
standards overnight. Getting it to the point where it could put up a
respectable defensive fight against western-level aggressors would be a
huge step forward. A professional military, rather than a bunch of
feudal levies, would be a big start.
3) Reform the currency. China was on the silver standard! Fix that.
4) A national assembly. OTL, 19th century China had lots of
provincial assemblies, but not a national one. It's a good way to
focus nationalist feeling, and also to draw out the competent and
ambitious for either co-opting or isolation. Long-term it might be a
rival center of authority, but that's long-term.
5) Reform _and expand_ the bureacracy. Easier said than done. But
you can't accomplish the reforms in education and the economy without a
powerful, competent and dedicated bureacracy. Taxes must be collected
and the new laws must be enforced. The Meiji Japanese had the unfair
advantage of inheriting a whole set of good instruments of government
from the Tokugawa. Still, China should be able to come up with
something nearly as good, given determination and a little time.
...time. How will the western powers, in the golden age of
imperialism, respond to a China that's serious about reform? How much
maneuvering room will Wong have?
Which brings us back to the central question: 19th century China --
totally screwed, or not?
Thoughts?
Doug M.
He is assasinated by a group of dishonarable ninjas, and history
forgets this, because anything otherwise wouldnt be very ninja like
b***@tcnj.edu
2006-09-13 23:03:33 UTC
Permalink
Something I came across:

Anyone who can might be interested in checking out the article in the
June 1997 Far Eastern Review: "Reflections on China's late 19th and
early 20th century economy".

"Western technology was only introduced in significant quantities after
1895, and manufacturing and the rest of the modern sectory, are early
20th century phenomenoms... But if a modern sector had actually taken
route 20 years earlier, and been able to keep up [the 6-8% now
associated with the Republica era] growth rate, then by the mid-1930s
the modern sector would have represented nearly a quarter the Chinese
economy."

Hrmm.

Loading...