How and why did the Chinese and Japanese responses to the West differ during the nineteenth century?



The key issue here, how and why the responses differed, is important because it enables us to understand how the continuing process of industrialisation is effected by both internal and external pressures. This matters because the processes of
industrialisation is still ongoing and having a better understanding of the past will lead us into making better decisions in the future. So to answer this question we shall look at the different responses to the West's encroachment into these nations, first the Chinese and then the Japanese, while analysing the social, cultural and political factors that had such a profound effect on the outcomes.

China's initial encounters with the west came as early as 1514, but by this time it was a self sufficient centralized state (Fairbank 1979:151) due to its regional dominance and trade ties created through the Tribute system (1979:160). The legacy of this cultural and regional domination led the Chinese to believe that 'China was the unique land of civilization' (Craig & Reischauer 1978:122). There was nothing that they could learn from the Western barbarians (1978:122). In fact they felt Westerners where no better than the Mongols and they had dealt with them by building the Great Wall of China. With this kind of attitude trade early on with the west was restricted to Canton (1979:162). The Canton System, as it was called, was problematic, but still benefits where enjoyed by all (1979:162). Unfortunately the status quo would not remain. Chinese domestic problems where just starting to emerge and these would have serious repercussions

The main problem in China during this period was the stagnation of the Manchu Dynasty. The subsequent decline of this centralized bureaucracy meant it was unable to respond to a population explosion that saw a two-fold increase from 200 to 400 million between the early and mid 19th century (1979:173). The roots of this phenomena originate in the internal peace brought about by the Manchu dynasty. They took advantage of an increase in foreign trade, improvements in transport and most crucially continued growth in food production to facilitate the necessary factors needed to see a sustained population increase (1979:173). But from this point onwards the Manchu's centralized bureaucracy started to become the problem. Its disconnect from the reality outside Peking meant policy was slow to respond, with one particular problem being that of the tax code (1979:174). The Manchu's inaction in regards to the tax code and the changing demographics had a drastic effect on the public purse. The reduction in government revenue and expenditure expedited the decline of institutions they had been created to maintain social order and stability. Of the many social problems this created the one that is of importance here is the surge in opium addiction.

Opium had a detrimental effect for several reasons. First for the Chinese the illicit trade in opium was not just aggravating current social problems but it was draining the countries capital reserves which led to an exasperation of wider economic problems (Harrison 1967:16). Secondly China's solution, suppression of the trade antagonised relations with western traders and this led to the collapse of the Canton system. By interfering with the trade of the narcotic the Chinese where hurting the British Empire at its weakest point, its capital surplus, and endangering its imperial mission of civilization. The actions taken by Commissioner Lin Tse-Hu, in 1840, to control the trade directly resulted in the two Opium Wars, with the subsequent result being that China capitulated to Western desires and interests in the region.

The Opium wars where an unmitigated disaster for the Chinese. For one thing it it could have been avoided but the decline of the Manchu dynasty had led to a situation where Peking was not receiving the information it required and so formulated policy based on the falsities it received from officials more interested in preserving the status quo (1967:30). In effect as Harrison (1967:31) notes this 'represented the growing degeneration of the financial health of the government and the people.' As a result of these factors the West forced the unequal treaties on china (1967:20). These treaties brought about a legal structure that had evolved by 1858 to a point where the West gained an upper hand against china in its demands for trade on its terms (1979:165).

These demands in general where not favourable to the Chinese but the most destructive was the 'most favoured nation clause.' This clause meant that all foreign powers shared the privileges that they leveraged out of the Chinese (1079:169). This diversion of income further compounded the situation for the Manchu Dynasty as now they had even less capital to halt the decay in the institutions tasked with preventing the social unrest that could lead to a fermenting and mobilising of Chinese society into revolutionary movements (1967:29). The first of which to appear in this period was the Taiping Rebellion.

The Taiping rebellion gained ground because it appealed to the poor and desperate in Chinese society by supporting the ancient right of peasant ownership through their agrarian reforms of 1853(1967:38). Unfortunately its nationalistic rhetoric put it at odds with the west (1967:39) and this was fundamental to its success, or lack of it, as the Imperial powers decided to prop up the Manchu Dynasty. The rebellion though did produce one development that is relevant here. To deal with the unrest Peking had given the provinces more power with the result that once this decentralisation was complete authority had shifted away from the centre to the provinces and the Manchus where never to regain it (1967:43).



This de-centralization led to the final disintegration of the old system but the problems that derived from the last century of decline where too powerful to overcome in the short term. It was not till 1901, after the third of the great shocks, with the restructuring of the Chinese state by the West that industrialization started to begin in earnest. Unfortunately by this time just across the seas the Japanese had emerged from their round of industrialisation to up surd the old order and become the new regional hegemon.

With the arrival of Western powers in Japan the reaction they received was rather similar to the Chinese one, initial isolation but increasing pressure from Western traders resulting in the signing of unequal treaties by the home nation.(1978:120). But unlike the the Chinese, Japanese society contained several factors that meant this position would not have such a prevalent influence. The first was the Japanese attitude to the outside world (1978:122). Where as the Chinese saw themselves as a superior civilization the Japanese, as Reischauer & Craig (1978:122) suggest, where distinct enough to have developed their own identity. One that, while weary of China, recognised a plurality of civilised nations due to the fact that they had learned from other nations. Entertaining the idea that they could learn from the West was not hard for the Japanese to embrace. Secondly as opposed to China's centralized bureaucracy Japanese society was still based on a feudal system unified under a shogun that was fast losing power to the 260 domains scattered throughout the country. This multitude of political systems resulted in a variety of responses to Western encroachment (1978:123) and unlike in China, the central authority here was unable to suppress the agents of change present in Japanese society.

These agents of change took the form of two domains, Satsuma and Choshu. As mentioned in the last paragraph the initial reaction to the West was expulsion and these two where no different. One example of this policy was the Choshu actions, while in the ascendancy in the spring of 1683, forcing the shogun into setting a date for the Westerners to be expelled. (1978:128) The subsequent display of military strength, meant to cast the barbarians out, resulted in military defeat, but it did reveal two factors: the lack of authority that the shogun held and the ineffectiveness of the Japanese defences against the superior military technology of the West (1978: 128-9)

Military defeat of the Choshu by the West, while humiliating, lead them to recognise the futility of their foreign policy but also and more importantly they realised the need to modernize their own military force and techniques (1978: 129) In the same period the Satsuma leaders also realised the same fact (1978:130) and possessing the necessary capital both regions embarked on a process of trade with the West (1978:127) that imported the technology and techniques required to eventually defeat the shogun and bring an end to the Tokugawa system. (1978:131)

With the end of the Tokugawa system Satsuma and Choshu as the two power houses in Japan led what Reischauer & Craig (1978: 134) called in 1868 an ''imperial restoration.'' This resulted in the creation of a new government headed by the Meiji Emperor. For now though it was largely a symbolic institution with power remaining with the samurai who led the revolution (1978:134), who still had a lot of work to do to meat the demands of industrialisation.

Two factors helped the new government go instigate change. To begin with the new administration was free from the attachments of tradition enabling them to institute drastic innovation. More importantly though the past 15 years of interaction with the West had brought many within Japan to realise that they required realistic policies that would help them retain their independence in the face of a foreign threat that was here for good (1978:135).

The new policies that where formulated recognised the need to match western military and economic power, and that to go about it would require a centralisation of authority so that reforms could be enacted (1978:135). The issuing of the ''Five Articles of Oath'' reaffirmed this believe and the direction of the new government (1978:135). The articles called for a establishment of assemblies for public debate, the removal of the old feudal restrictions and finally a call of adherence to the just laws of nature (1978:135).

What this last article meant in reality was that knowledge from around the world would be instrumental in establishing and strengthening the new Japan (1978:136). In effect the new order had moved from its original position of expulsion to that of, as Reischauer & Craig (1978:136) suggest, reinventing the ancient Chinese idea of 'fukoku kyobei' (a rich country and strong military) through western technology. These changes where successful for two reasons; firstly because the factions in charge of government, Choshu and Satsuma, where the strongest domains and they where able to co-opt the rest for fear of being left out of the new state being built (1978:137). Secondly unlike China where the Emperor was seen as part of the old elite system the Japanese emperor was not and this made it a lot easier for power to be handed back to a strong central authority. With a determined administration in place, that now had the requisite authority, the Meiji Restoration set about solving the domestic and foreign policy dilemma that where holding the country back (1978:144). Japan was so successful at this transition that by 1905 they had revised the unequal treaties, invaded China, formed an alliance with Britain and defeated the Russian navy.

In conclusion the evidence presented shows that while both nations where initially inclined to observe isolationist policies when it came to the West, Japanese culture allowed it to recognise the futility of this stance while the Chinese sense of its own superiority blinded it to the strength of Western imperialism. This arrogance along with the centralized bureaucracy of the Manchu Dynasty led to a stagnation of policy meaning that the Chinese administrators could not react to the changes industrialisation was bringing to the country. Meanwhile the feudal system still operating in Japan allowed a fluidity of political alternatives to exist that facilitated a more positive response to Western encroachment. This acceptance of Western technologies and ideas led Japan to not only industrialize faster than China but to become a power that rivalled any nation in the west. Though as we can see from events occurring in the world today it could be argued that China, since the mid 1990's, has re-emerged not just as a regional hegemon but in this time of global economic crisis possibly the one nation that could up surd America as the new global superpower.

Bibliography:
Craig, A. & Reischauer, E., 1978. Japan tradition and transformation. Cambridge (MA): Houghton Mifflin School
Fairbank, J.K., 1979. The United States and China. 4th ed. London: Harvard University Press
Harrison, J. 1967. China since 1800. New York: Brace & World

Why did colonial Virginians replace servitude with slavery?



The question of why Virginians replaced servitude, the system of locking immigrants from the old world into long contracts of service to pay off their passage, with slavery is an important one to discuss as it gives us an insight into the type of processes that would allow such a morally apprehensible situation to occur and hopefully prevent a similar situation re-occurring in the future. I believe that the primary driver of this process was the development of the tobacco industry and the demographic changes in England of the 17th century. This subsequently caused labour supply problems in Virginia forcing planters to make a long term economic decision, namely to replace indentured servants with slaves. There was other factors such as theology, racism and skill sets but these affected the choice of peoples enslaved, namely West Africans, and worked in combination with the above, as Ira Berlin notes (1998:8), to facilitate a transformation of Virginia from a society with slaves into a slave society by 1705.
After several years of disease, conflict and other hardships the Virginian colony and economy finally stabilised around the mid 1610's with the establishment of tobacco as its main cash crop (Woods 1997:71). At first the settlers recognised that they had two problems to overcome; that of land and labour (1997:72). The first problem, that of land, was easy enough to overcome as they just took what they wanted (1997:72) especially after the 'Massacre of 1622' gave them the necessary justification to expand onto the land of the indigenous population (1997:72). With this out of they way they could turn their attention to the second problem; satisfying the necessary labour requirements of working the tobacco fields.
Initially there was three solutions presented to solve this problem; Indians, Indentured servitude or West Africans (1997:74). First they tried to enslave the indigenous Indians but this proved to be troublesome for two reasons; they would run away and it did not make good business sense to enslave peoples that the colonists where trying to forge trading and commercial links with (1997:75). With the initial experiment with Indians out of the way they turned to the tried and tested English institution of servitude which they developed to suit their own needs (1997:75). This solved the problem and by the mid 1620's servitude was widespread on the plantations of Virginia (1997:76) and the need for slaves was not at this point realised. Unfortunately for the planters indentured servitude contained the seeds of the next problem they would encounter.
To entice people to agree to indentured servitude the colonists had to grant them the one thing they could not achieve back in England, their liberty, mainly through the promise of land grants when they reached the end of their service(1997:76). This meant that the turnover within the labour force was quite high and made the planters reliant on new servants arriving to replace those that had finished their service. Also the high proportion of poor whites from England caused many social problem, from discontented runaway servants (Parent 2003:57) to newly freed servants turning to insurrection such as in the case of Bacons rebellion (Foner 2006:53). These problems resulted from the deteriorating conditions for servants and the finite opportunities available to those newly freed from servitude. When this news reached England the new world did not appear to be as attractive a prospective as it had been in previous years (2003:56). In addition to this changes back in England, namely demographics, also started to hit recruitment to the colonies.
From the 1660s onwards demographics started to have a profound effect on the English economy. Lower birth rates, disease and migration where relieving the pressure on the economy (2003:58). With lower numbers entering the work force there was reduced competition in the 15 – 24 age range, those most likely to venture to the new world, and this was enhanced further with the Great fire of London in 1666 that led to boom within the building sector and the economy as a whole (2003:58-59). The attitude of the elites to the poor subsequently changed and as Parent (2003:59) puts it they where now seen as a natural resource and the key to profit in the newly industrialising economy. This meant for the first time the prospect of staying in England appeared to offer more prospects than emigrating to America. This was reflected in government policy that in 1680 saw the prosecution of merchants involved in the transportation of servants to the colonies and the encouragement of the slave trade from Africa to the colonies (2003:59-60).
The reduction in the numbers of servants made planters look at the economics of the slave trade (2003:60). This became even more crucial in 1681 as the tobacco price fell by 50% meaning that planters had to look to other ways to reduce costs and as Colonel Nicholas Spencer stated in 1683 ''..Blacks can make it cheaper than Whites.'' (2003:60) Fortunately for Virginian planters one factor that had initially made slavery an unattractive economic proposition in Virginia, demand for slaves in the Caribbean and the subsequent inflation of prices due to this, was finally changing. This demand had meant that very few slaves made it to Virginia but with the deterioration of plantations in islands such as Barbados, the dropping of sugar prices, over investment in the slave trade and the Royal Africa Company monopoly we saw an increasing debt crisis from the 1680s onwards (2003:69). With the defaulting of loans from Caribbean planters the slave traders started to consider Virginia and for the first time Virginians now had favourable economic conditions and a supply of slaves that could facilitate the switch from servants to slaves (2003:70). Now while economics and demographics seem to have played a crucial role in this switch there is also the question of how a society that was based around the ideas of freedom from oppression of the old world and liberty could go down this path of enslavement.
Here another line of thought crops up; one that suggests that there was a certain predisposition that the colonist held that led to the choice of West Africans as the peoples enslaved (1997:6). Authors like Wood suggest that this predisposition was a combination of views that the colonist brought with them from the old world. These
views and ideals where a combination of theology, that allowed bondage of those of different religions (1997:10), and previous held racist ideas of West Africans as strangers who were as Foner (2006:50) states ''...savage, pagan and uncivilized'' (Foner 2006:50). This combination of ideals fitted in with the aspirations of planters who increasing saw slavery as an institution that was becoming indispensable to them in preserving their liberty, I.E. profit (1997:8), and so they set forth enshrining these beliefs into law.
In the early days of the colony black’s legal status was rather unambiguous. So planters tried to incorporate their rights over slaves into law and by 1669 had achieved some of their goals, such as the right to do as they pleased with them (1997:89). From here they still had to clarify two things; what rights slaves retained and on what grounds they could appeal for freedom. To achieve this final eradication of black’s rights planters turned to Christian theology. There had been for a long time a link between bondage and those of different religions dating back to the crusades (1997:8). At the same time to prevent slaves using the same theology to convert to Christianity as a way to achieve freedom, the planters codified the link between Christianity and bondage into law putting a stop to this practise (1997:90). While the planters where convinced in their justification of slavery as necessary, they had a vested interest in this institution as it protected their interests, but this was not true of the rest of colonial society. Planters still needed to enlist the support of working class whites to fortify their hold over colonial society.
With the status of blacks now starting to be enshrined in law, based around old world concepts of slavery, they now started to infuse the debate with language of racism in an attempt as Woods (1997:90) puts it to dehumanises Africans. This allowed planters to evolve old ideas of religious hatred through the latter half of the 17th century into one based on race in an attempt to co-opt working class whites into alliances against the slave population (1997:91). While they may not have been totally successful in this operation, the lack of opportunities for poor whites led to them moving to parts of the colonies where advancement was better. This made it easier to bring the small groups of whites left into an arrangement where they became part of policing mechanisms over slaves (1997:90). With this hardening of racist views and solidifying of alliances of whites against blacks the planters finally codified in to law,
in 1705, Virginia's slave laws (1997:92) and the transformation into a slave society was now complete.
While the evidence seems to support the thesis that a complex mix of economics, demographics and racist ideology made the switch from indentured servitude to slavery possible. There are those who suggest that it was purely economics and demographics and not that of race (1997:81). They point to the fact that the experiences of early slaves shows that there was no predisposition to racism. One of the most famous examples is that of Anthony Johnson. Johnson was a slave who arrived in Virginia in 1621 and managed to obtain his freedom and land and was rather successful suggesting that racism and enslavement of West Africans was not conclusively on the cards at his point (1997:81). But as Woods (1997:82) counters, while slavery of West Africans may not have been at this point certain, there was racist overtones present in elite Virginian society. Here she points to Rolfe's references to blacks as 'Negars' as evidence of whites seeing themselves as different to blacks. While Ira Berlin also refutes this argument by pointing to the ambiguity of blacks status in law (Berlin 1998:44) and their initial equality with working class whites within Virginia's economy that allowed them this measure of freedom (1998:33)
In conclusion the switch from indentured servitude to slavery primarily took place due to economic and demographic necessities. But as the evidence show these factors took place within a society that had many other complex factors at work. These factors included ideas imported from England especially in the sphere of theology and previously held racist ideas of West Africans. So while the enslavement of blacks does appear to not have been pre-determined. When it became a viable way for planter elites to fortify their positions and hold over colonial society it certainly did not take them long to revert to racial stereotypes as a means of securing their liberty at the expense of others. Even today the divisions created in this period still reverberate. The zeal that the planter elites went about codifying these notions into law and the schisms they created between whites and blacks, which produced views of the latter as second class people in American society, in this period have had long lasting effects that we saw come to the fore in the recent US election. On many occasions we saw American whites refer to President elect Oboma as an Arab and someone that could not be trusted (BBC 2008) drawing parallels to the views that colonists held of those that where religiously and ethnically different to them in the 17th century.

Bibliography:
BBC, 2008. Obama outlines economic package. [online] (updated 13 Oct 2008)
Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7667772.stm
[Accessed 25 Nov 2008]
Berlin, I., 1998. Many thousand gone: the first two centuries of slavery in North America. Cambridge (MASS), The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press
Foner, E., 2006. Give me liberty: An American history. New York, W.W. Norton
Wood, B., 1997. The origins of American slavery: Freedom and bondage in the English colonies. New York, Hill and Wang
Parent, A., 2003. Foul Means: The Formation of a Slave Society in Virginia, 1660-1740. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press

Hello, well after a fairly lenghty absence I am finally back and even though I do not have time to add much I have just started university at Sussex studying International Relations and American Studies. So I shall be posting essays I write for these courses at a minimum.